Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ajaccio phare citadelle.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Ajaccio phare citadelle.jpg, featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2013 at 11:55:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created, uploaded and nominated by Myrabella -- Myrabella (talk) 11:55, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Support -- Myrabella (talk) 11:55, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Oppose QI but not FP. Not enough wow. Composition focuses my eye on the small object in the sea to the left, rather than lighthouse. -- Colin (talk) 13:23, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
- Info The small object is a complementary light (range: 7 miles (13 Km)). The main lighthouse has a range of 16 miles (30 Km). They work as a set, in fact! --Myrabella (talk) 13:42, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
- Support Good colors and atmosphere. Plenty of wow for me. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:22, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
- Support —Mono 23:49, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose If the lighthouse is the main subject, it should have been given more prominence. Right now, it just occupies a small fraction of the frame. A re-compose may help --Dey.sandip (talk) 07:57, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
- Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 12:27, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
- Support--JLPC (talk) 15:12, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
- Support --Joydeep Talk 17:36, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
- Support Very good light and composition.--Jebulon (talk) 20:47, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose Composition issues, per Dey. Too much in the image if the lighthouse is meant to be the subject. Daniel Case (talk) 15:08, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose per others. --Ivar (talk) 11:53, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Comment I understand opositions of others and I think the left part is not the problem... it's the low part. The fact the eyes ares focused on the small object at left is not a problem IMO because it's a part of the composition and it's not bad, if you crop the low part (see note) your composition take all its purpose and the image is more balanced, I've tried and I think it's much better. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:56, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Done Well, Christian, I think you may be right. I made a crop as suggested, and I am rather happy with the result.New version uploaded, thank you for the suggestion. --Myrabella (talk) 14:01, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
- Support No, thank you to have tried --Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:09, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
- Support Michael Barera (talk) 00:16, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
- weak Support Blurred Lines 14:41, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose Composition, per others. --Laitche (talk) 20:29, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Alternative[edit]
- Thanks to all the reviewers. Taking account of criticism about the composition, I propose this alternative where the lighthouse itself is more prominent. It is not a crop but another shot. --Myrabella (talk) 20:45, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
- Support this. --Ivar (talk) 07:22, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Neutral The lighthouse is more prominent in this, no doubt. However, the lighting seems a bit harsh for this type of out-door image --Dey.sandip (talk) 10:46, 1 November 2013 (UTC)- Oppose --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:49, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
- Neutral IMHO the first one is better --Berthold Werner (talk) 13:11, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
- Neutral as Berthold, the other one is better to me. --Joydeep Talk 18:09, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
- Neutral better before imo. —Mono 02:45, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
- Neutral Une belle QI... Pour le reste tu connais mon opinion, qui est celle de Christian Ferrer.--Jebulon (talk) 11:00, 2 November 2013 (UTC)et techniquement, s'agissant d'une autre prise de vue, ce n'est pas une "alternative", à mon avis !
- Neutral Blurred Lines 14:31, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places
The chosen alternative is: File:Ajaccio phare citadelle.jpg
