Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bahía de Cámara de Lobos, Madeira, Portugal, 2019-05-29, DD 51-58 PAN.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Bahía de Cámara de Lobos, Madeira, Portugal, 2019-05-29, DD 51-58 PAN.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2019 at 13:03:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Portugal
Info Bay of Câmara de Lobos, Madeira, Portugal. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 13:03, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 13:03, 30 November 2019 (UTC)- Support Impressive resolution! The cropped buildings at the bottom are a bit unfortunate, but otherwise this is a great panorama. --Domob (talk) 15:18, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
Oppose I have counted at least six stitching errors, one of which is quite ugly across the boats. Please check your work before nominating! Overall looks like a good place for photographing, but light conditions were imho not favorable, sharpness is not very good on the left side and bottom crop is unfortunate. --Ivar (talk) 16:32, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
- Ivar: Thank you for all those notes. I've fixed the stitching issues, regarding the bigger ones in the middle, they are new and unintended due to a perspective edit I performed today. I'm surprised to see the result. Regarding sharpness, I agree, one or two frames could be sharper, but they don't look bad to me and I'm offering a 140 MPx image here. Is the lighting so bad? Regarding the crop at the bottom, I can say that I ran the area up and down and still believe that this one was the best spot to shot. --Poco a poco (talk) 17:24, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
Comment I'm looking at the very first version of this panorama and I like it more than the last one. Clouds and shadows are nicely visible and even the right crop looks more pleasant. --Ivar (talk) 17:49, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
- Funny, I do prefer this crop but no problem to offer that version as alt, too. Any other opinions? --Poco a poco (talk) 20:45, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
- Support more for the extraordinarily high resolution than for anything exceptional in terms of light or composition. Cmao20 (talk) 23:32, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
- Support per Cmao20. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:03, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose - High resolution is not a criterirum for promotion while image quality and composition are not the best. Alvesgaspar (talk) 12:02, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose Not finding the composition compelling. The right third isn't contributing positively and better focused on the harbour. The overcast light is not appealing. -- Colin (talk) 12:26, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose I think this could be an FP with the right light and sky. Daniel Case (talk) 04:20, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
Weak oppose Of course the resolution is outstanding, but I think the noise in darker areas is too much for me. This is a high quality image, but I assume there are more tweaks needed that explain a proper FP promotion. I'm always sorry when I decline an image where the author has surely spend much time on, but maybe the issues are fixable somehow --PantheraLeo1359531 (talk) 18:56, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination Poco a poco (talk) 17:08, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 17:10, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
