Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Зимова фортеця.jpg

File:Зимова фортеця.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2018 at 13:10:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Зимова фортеця.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Зимова фортеця.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications
•  Info created - uploaded by Moahim - nominated by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 13:10, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support -- Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 13:10, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 16:48, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Oppose Too small and too grainy for me.--Peulle (talk) 18:34, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Comment - Talk about the size. I'm inclined to support because the unsharpness is part of a mood that I like, but if you downsized it to make it look better, that's against policy. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:58, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Comment I don't think it's been downsized, but it's not a great camera so possibly that's why it's very grainy/soft. Also, is F22 right for this sort of shot? I suspect not. Charles (talk) 19:14, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

•  Oppose technical quality not there. Charles (talk) 15:22, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

•  Oppose I like the mood but Charles has a point ... most of the other 30-second exposures we've featured in less-than-dark conditions are not this grainy. Daniel Case (talk) 07:11, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Done I tried to fix this isues. --Moahim (talk) 09:40, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Karelj (talk) 19:37, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support - It looks better, and I'm inclined not to care about a bit of unsharpness in the sky because it's the gesture of the clouds that really counts. I'm just torn because nowadays, FPs are usually much bigger files than this. I'm going with my heart and supporting this because I find it beautiful and satisfying to look at, but it really is a bit of a stretch. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:08, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Neutral Pleasant image but not the best settings (F22), lack of sharpness -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:03, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

• I didn't have ND filter, so it was the only way to make a long shutter speed. --Moahim (talk) 06:01, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

•  Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:35, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Weak support Composition, lighting and subject are really nice, but the quality/size is indeed not at FP level, just over the bar IMHO --Poco² 17:14, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 08:49, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Comment - I have a nagging feeling about this photo that if we make it an FP, in a few years, we'll be voting on a nomination to delist it. Should that be a consideration now, or should we just vote based on our evaluation in the present? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:59, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

I don't see why it should be delisted...!?! what is this comment? it's a very decent photo. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:39, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

For technical reasons. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:43, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

IMO if you are not an experimented photographer yourself, then you should be careful when you listen the "pseudo-specialist", especially those who those who have easy criticism, they are usually the same who are much more inclined to criticize photos of others than to their own photography, and nothing is less sure that they are able to do better... Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 04:33, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

It's objectively a lot smaller than most of the photos we are voting to feature at this point, right? But do note that I voted to support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:58, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Also, I'm surely not saying I could do better. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:59, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Just for your info, this size is absolutely not a small size in regard to that camera. See [1]. And almost all the opposers, are not really able to do better with their bigger camera, otherwise I wonder where are their so good nomination(s) of long exposure photography. Regards, Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 05:14, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

As one of the opposers, I add a comment. I do not submit long-exposure shots and it's not my area of expertise, but I feel I am able to make a technical appraisal of image technical quality. I suspect that many of the appraisals of my macro lens photos are done by talented photographers/photo enthusiasts who have never taken macro photos of frisky insects at ground level. But they can judge the results, having looked at many similar FP nominations. Charles (talk) 10:40, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

•  Support --Tozina (talk) 20:40, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:29, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications