Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Asclepeion Epidaurus (3).jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Asclepeion Epidaurus (3).jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Nov 2017 at 09:30:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Greece
- Info Heavy rain clouds over the ancient site at Epidaurus. The only editing done is perspective; the clouds are as dark as they were in reality. The ruins of the ancient temple to Asclepius stands in a prominent position in the sanctuary. All by User:Peulle. -- Peulle (talk) 09:30, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- Support -- Peulle (talk) 09:30, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- Comment - There's what looks to me like a fairly prominent dusk spot in a dark part of the cloud; let me know if you need for me to try to mark the spot. Otherwise, I like this photo as a "landscape with ruins" that reminds me of 18th-century paintings. Are you defining your photo as "landscape with ruins and dark clouds"? I think defining it that way, rather than as a view of just the ruins, just might make the difference between approval and failure for this nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:47, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- Done Thanks for spotting the dust. :) And yes, this is definitely not just a photo of the ruins; the reason I felt it might deserve the FP badge is because of the light created by the sun behind those heavy clouds. Should I specify this in the image description too, or is it sufficient to say it in this nomination?--Peulle (talk) 15:22, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- Information about the photo and the scene goes on the file's page. Information about the FPC nomination and arguments pro or con, goes only on the nomination page. I don't think someone using a Wikipedia or this image data bank will be interested in reading about why a photo should be featured. --cart-Talk 19:18, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- Done Thanks for spotting the dust. :) And yes, this is definitely not just a photo of the ruins; the reason I felt it might deserve the FP badge is because of the light created by the sun behind those heavy clouds. Should I specify this in the image description too, or is it sufficient to say it in this nomination?--Peulle (talk) 15:22, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose Underexposed zones and composition --The Photographer 16:36, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- Mild Support - I don't feel strongly about this photo, but I think we should accept Peulle's statement that the clouds (and presumably the rest of the picture) is as dark as it actually was. I like the light, shadow and ruins in the picture. Colin might say that I'm being too influenced by this reminding me of good paintings with similar subject matter, and if he did say that, he might be right, so I'm hedging a little by only mildly supporting, though of course I'm aware that regardless of how strong or weak my vote is, it counts just as much (or as little). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:15, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose Dark clouds and sunlight can be a good combination but overall this is a bit underwhelming. The actual monument is really not very much at all (see this angle). The scene reminds me a bit of File:Tourists posing at the National Monument of Scotland.jpg, and even that joke of a monument is more complete than this. The tourists, scrap metal poles and orange and blue distractions (car? junk?). Overall the image is really soft, so either there's a focus error and/or the use of f/16 on a crop sensor with that superzoom lens is just too much diffraction softening. Ikan, yes the problem about being reminded about better famous artwork, is it reminds me the famous artwork is better. While echoing a famous motif is fine, one's execution of it really has to stand alone, rather than relying on a memory of something else. -- Colin (talk) 21:33, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- Comment - Your point of view is logical. I'll consider whether to change my vote to neutral. But in partial argument (though, again, I don't feel strongly about this), I don't think this has to be as good as the best of the "landscape with ruins" paintings to be a viable FP. It doesn't look like this will pass at FPC, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:48, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- I only say it should "stand alone" as a great image, not that it is as good as or better than some classic artwork. I don't find a "reminds me of a great work" to be a convincing reason to support an image. -- Colin (talk) 08:31, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
- Sure. Something can remind you of a great work while being utter schlock. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:20, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Ikan Kekek: if that's your way of saying that this particular image is poor, I'd call that the best hidden insult ever. :D --Peulle (talk) 13:20, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
- No, that's a general statement. If I thought this image was poor, I wouldn't have voted for it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:09, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Ikan Kekek: if that's your way of saying that this particular image is poor, I'd call that the best hidden insult ever. :D --Peulle (talk) 13:20, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
- Sure. Something can remind you of a great work while being utter schlock. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:20, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose per Colin. It seems to have trouble deciding what it wants to be. Maybe this would work with sunlight on the ruin and/or less background. Daniel Case (talk) 06:05, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /MZaplotnik(talk) 15:39, 15 November 2017 (UTC)