Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ëur de Bredles Secëda Odles y Sas Rigais da Resciesa.jpg

File:Ëur de Bredles Secëda Odles y Sas Rigais da Resciesa.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 May 2023 at 06:00:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Ëur de Bredles Secëda Odles y Sas Rigais da Resciesa.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ëur de Bredles Secëda Odles y Sas Rigais da Resciesa.jpg

6570

1259

1110

390

15000

7192

The line mentioned by Je-str

6150

250

1000

100

15000

7192

Here is the line that i meant -- Je-str (talk) 20:14, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Italy#Trentino-Alto Adige
•  Info All by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 06:00, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 06:00, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Question I really like the image of the imposing peaks towering over a house, but is the sky too purplish toward the right? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:35, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

  It might be more purplish since it is a very wide panorama Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 11:25, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Question And can you give us more sky? Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:15, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

  I can add some with photoshop Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 11:24, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

• Sorry, I meant from the RAW file, not the computer! Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:33, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

• Does it make a difference if the end result is the same? (which is not quite the case here though, as there's a faint line between the original sky and the added one) --Julesvernex2 (talk) 17:12, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

• Who knows! Everyone has their own standards of what cloning and other post-processing they do. Here, I won't vote against if the messy sky is sorted but even well done, adding the sky would stop me supporting. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:00, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:35, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

• It's more sky than optimal now, though, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:23, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

• Agree. Too much sky now as part of the composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:38, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Weak oppose Tight crops. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:45, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the amendments, Wolfgang Moroder!  Support. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:00, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

•  changed the crop --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 12:14, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Neutral IMO the bright areas are to bright and it looks like a touch of magenta. --XRay 💬 08:06, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Support The file is very big, but the quality is good. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 13:03, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Info -- I like your mountain panoramas, but here there is a strange line in the sky (at the top, just above the highest peak). Also, I agree with XRay 💬 and find at least the left side overexposed. See here: File:Odles Eures de Bredles Schienboden.jpg. Maybe you can correct the mistakes, then I agree with yes.Je-str (talk) 21:39, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

  Hi, thanks for your note. I corrected the artifacts but can't correct the exposition besides the fact that the light conditions in the picture you indicate are completely different. Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 16:20, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

   Weak oppose -- Artefacts, and per Daniel Case . Sorry but for an excellent result everything really has to fit. Je-str (talk) 15:17, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 07:45, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Tomer T (talk) 08:33, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose -- Everything is good, but the right corner is a problem. Dion Art (talk) 09:26, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks for the note, I fixed the right corner Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 16:07, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

  I meant that the slope of the mountain and the green hill form an angle that abuts against the right frame. You have left "fade in" and you need also a right "fade out". Dion Art (talk) 21:04, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

  Sorry but I don't understand this which sounds almost philosophical :-) Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 14:56, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Comment Good for me, I would just suggest to clone out the line mentioned by Je-str (see image note) and eventually to reduce the exposure on the left-most mountains a bit. --Aristeas (talk) 14:39, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose The version you nominated might have been a bit close-cropped, but it was a better composition than this version, and it also lacked the artifacts (more than just a line) noted above. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:01, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Leeeunsuk (talk) 16:36, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

• invalid vote (less than 50 edits) -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:51, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Neutral Light on mountains at left is a bit harsh ... could the highlights there be reduced? Daniel Case (talk) 17:59, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- -donald- (talk) 09:13, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 10:32, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --LR0725 (talk) 18:26, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose A few technical flaws in the sky, and per Daniel -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:50, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 5 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /FPCBot (talk) 13:00, 27 May 2023 (UTC) --Palauenc05 (talk) 14:23, 27 May 2023 (UTC)