Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Титов врв и Бакардан, Шар Планина.jpg

File:Титов врв и Бакардан, Шар Планина.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 May 2016 at 12:39:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Титов врв и Бакардан, Шар Планина.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Титов врв и Бакардан, Шар Планина.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
•  Info created by Gadjowsky - uploaded by Gadjowsky - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:39, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
•  Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:39, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose - This picture looks beautiful until you look at full size; then, it looks really weird (I'm guessing those are what are described as "JPG artifacts", but someone else will confirm or refute that that's what I'm seeing). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:42, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
• Weak  Support. It doesn't look like JPEG artefacts, just overall unsharpness. Downsampling by 50% still leaves 9 MP and is reasonably sharp, so it's enough for me to support because of the huge wow factor. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:23, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment - It's more than just unsharpness. There are a whole bunch of weird blotches in the sky. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:48, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

• King of Hearts please look at the sky. Although the landscape is sharp enough at 50%, the sky remains a mess, and while 9MP might be barely acceptable for a typical aspect-ratio landscape image, it is well below standard for a panorama. When landscapes that are sharp at 50MP get opposes over pixel-level details only visible at 100%, I'm not really sympathetic to a landscape that is so poor quality that I can see the 8x8px JPG chunks that make it up. -- Colin (talk) 12:00, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

• Colin: Ah, missed that. When people complain about quality problems and don't mention noise, the last place I'd think of looking is the sky. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:32, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

•  Oppose Unsharp. Please add info about stitching. -- -donald- (talk) 07:04, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose Dreadful quality. The square-chunky blotches are a mix of JPG artifacts (low quality JPG compression used) and over-processing leading to posterisation of the colours. I'm not convinced about the landscape colours either. -- Colin (talk) 12:00, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per Colin. INeverCry 19:10, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
•  I withdraw my nomination--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:30, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:04, 13 May 2016 (UTC)