Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Шпиці 3.jpg

File:Шпиці 3.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jun 2019 at 15:24:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Шпиці 3.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Шпиці 3.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Ukraine
•  Info created by Swift11 - uploaded by Swift11 - nominated by Swift11 -- Михайло Пецкович (talk) 15:24, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- Михайло Пецкович (talk) 15:24, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
•  Abstain Your camera is capable of 10 MPx and this image has 5 MPx. As you never answered the inquiries about possible downsampling in your previous nomination and spoonfeeding an updated version of slightly larger size, I will not even bother this time. In my opinion you are trying to make the image appear to be of better quality and it's generally not appreciated here. Both are great photos, no need for this chicanery. – Lucas^T 16:24, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

•  Done Please, the size has increased to the maximum -- Swift11 13:30, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
• ... Lucas, please explain what rules I am violating when submitting a photo not in full size? I'm new to this resource ... -- Swift11 13:37, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

• There's no strict rule I'm aware of, but generally here at Commons we prefer the highest resolution available for multiple reasons and being able to review images fairly and accurately is an additional one. In the case of FP nomination downscaling can be understood as deceiving the reviewers and you don't do a good job of removing that feeling. Even here you increased the size step by step in the file history. – Lucas^T 10:55, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

• ... Lucas, 1. Since there are no clear rules, and I'm a novice here, I have not imagined that should load a file with maximum resolution! And you do not get tired of accusing of cheating! 2. Now, I know about this unwritten rule. I uploaded a photo of the maximum size. Are you satisfied? I please other remarks! :-) ... -- Swift11 18:30, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

• I'm sorry, I should have made the situation clear in the previous nomination but became frustrated with you too quickly which was in part due to problems with another user not related to this. That said, please try to be more open about what processing you did so accustations can be resolved quickly and ask questions if you are unsure. You delivered after all so I might revisit the photo for a review. – Lucas^T 21:27, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

• Oh, you scared all the photocritics from this photo ... :-) -- Swift11 18:37, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

•  Neutral Per Lucas. Really, there isn't any need to downsize - most of us are fairly good at realising that we can't expect the same quality at pixel level that we get at smaller sizes. Cmao20 (talk) 20:29, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

• I uploaded a photo of the maximum size. Do you have any more critical comments on the photo? -- Swift11 18:37, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

•  Support - Not a critical comment here, Swift11, but it's important for you to ping everyone who's voted or commented on this photo, now that you've provided the full-resolution version of it. To be sure, it's not nearly as large as many of the nominees in recent years, but I think it's big enough if that's all you've got (and if it's not, cough up the full size, but you said this was the "maximum", so I assume it is). I didn't like the smaller version, which seemed to have visible posterization lines around the sun. These are absent in this version. This image is surreal and would be a good album cover for a 70s progressive rock group like Yes. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:11, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

•  Comment - One other comment: If you're up to adding an English-language file description, that would be welcome. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:12, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
•  DoneAdded a description in English-language -- Swift11 18:54, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

• Thanks Swift11. I think that's big enough now (Ikan Kekek it is 9.9 mpx which is what we would expect from his camera). Thus  Support but do provide the full-res version in the future. Cmao20 (talk) 21:22, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

•  Abstain Per Lucas--BoothSift 23:39, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

* Neutral per Lucas.--Vulphere 08:07, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

•  Oppose per Lucas. --Peulle (talk) 08:42, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

• 1-Lucas – Support, 2-Peulle , per Lucas – Oppose.... A very fun resource  :-) -- Swift11 13:38, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

• Boothsift, Vulphere, Peulle, the image is no longer downscaled so you might want to revisit your comments. An oppose for downscaling alone is no longer applicable. – Lucas^T 21:34, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Looks better, now  Support.--Vulphere 23:16, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

I agree, moving to  Support now--Boothsift 05:40, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

•  Comment I don't mind the size but like your previous nomination, I think this looks over-processed. Looking through your upload I see that it's a style you seem to have. I noticed that you had another version of the previous nom, File:Polonyna v tumanah.jpg, which looks much more natural than the File:За селом 2.jpg you nominated. Do you perhaps have another, less processed version of this? --Cart (talk) 18:37, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

• Visit the mountains in the morning or in the evening after a thunderstorm, and you will be surprised that there are saturated warm and saturated cold colors. -- Swift11 09:37, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

•  Weak oppose per Cart. I'm aware that there can be strong colors in the sky around the sun given the right combination of recent weather, humidity and the angle of the sun. I have experienced that myself, and photographed it—however, it was under unusual conditions, during a very late white-night sunset in the Canadian far north, helped by a little smoke in the air, and when I processed those photos I may well have yielded to the temptation to lay it on a bit.

  I am not sure the same thing hasn't happened here, especially given that this sun does not seem so close to the horizon. It's a beautiful scene, to be sure, but it looks like the matte background you'd see behind Kirk, Spock, McCoy and the redshirts as they beam down. Or on the cover of the paperback James Blish adaptation. Daniel Case (talk) 21:21, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

• "... it seems to him!!!!!!! ..." "he certainly was not in the mountains but convinced!!!!!!!!!!!! .." But open your eyes and see that the sun is coming out of the spine (behind the ridge, there is a distant that is in the fog) !? I am impressed by the "competence" of critics! I see that it is not possible to force a waiter to go where they can not understand. I do not think that there will be a desire to load here something else! What else do you think !? Tell me, we will laugh with the darts! PS. And it seems to me that you are blaming what you have not seen! PS.PS. Daniel Case:"which also looks like it could have been added as a texture in Photoshop—I'm not saying that it was" https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:_%D0%97%D0%B0_%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%BC_2.jpg ))) "Swift11 18:54, 5 June 2019 (UTC) 09:27, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

•  Support Now that I'm cooled off, I think the special mood of this combined with the strong composition of the rock formations is something very much worth featuring. Regarding processing, I'll allow some leeway for the photographer to show how the scene made an impression to him. – Lucas^T 06:07, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
•  Support Millennium bug (talk) 17:26, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Rbrechko (talk) 10:57, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --СССР (talk) 12:20, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 03:52, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Ralf Roletschek 21:19, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
•  Support Is this on Earth? ;o) --Yann (talk) 04:48, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Ermell (talk) 12:16, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Tomer T (talk) 21:07, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural