Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Capitolhill panorama 1.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

File:Capitolhill panorama 1.jpg,not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jun 2015 at 06:19:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Extremely high resolution panorama of Capitol Hill, Seattle and surrounding regions during sunset.
  • @Laitche: @Poco a poco: @Colin: What do you guys think of the Alternative with faithful colours below? Also, will Laitche please explain what you mean by "quality is not reaching the FP standards"? In terms of resolution, image noise, sharpness, distortion, etc, I think this is pretty good. Thanks! Dllu (talk) 00:53, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The noise level is not at all visible if you view it at 50%, which is 11194 x 3440, still much better than many other panoramas which have passed FP status. Dllu (talk) 01:13, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, if it is nominated at 50% downsampled, the noise level is probably acceptable. I think every member is judging nominated one not what if downsampled... --Laitche (talk) 01:59, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Laitche: You are mistaken. The Commons:Image guidelines clearly states that images should not be downsampled under any circumstance. A 150 megapixel image with a slight amount of noise when inspecting individual pixels is always better than a 15 megapixel image that appears as though it does not have any noise. Dllu (talk) 02:04, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, so I am not suggesting downsampling, I just wrote my thoughts why every member is not supporting this great panorama but not sure cause I don't know the others thoughts :) --Laitche (talk) 02:15, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Laitche: will you stop pixel-peeping. This image, when viewed on your monitor at 100% is over 5 metres wide. And are complaining about noise which is only visible from close inspection at that level on a 155MP image! We do not encourage people to downsize images for Commons and unfortunately Commons MediaWiki software cannot render a 50% view of such a large image for people to review. You say you are not suggesting downsampling but your oppose for noise leaves nominators no option but to upload downsized images to prevent this sort of petty and ignorant review. Stop it and please learn how to review digital images properly. We look at the image, not the pixels. Dllu, I'll look at the alternative tonight if I get a chance. -- Colin (talk) 07:28, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • They aren't "my ideas" but the standard mature approach to reviewing digital images. Pixel-peeping is universally regarded as a newbie mistake in all photographic forums. Your "don't criticize me, my ideas are precious" approach to life is fine for primary-school children, but in the real world of grown ups, you should welcome criticism and learn from it. Your pixel-peeping approach to image review is positively harmful to FP and you should stop doing it. Learn to look at the picture. -- Colin (talk) 10:12, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is most regrettable that we now need rules to document common sense. Meanwhile you continue to make a mockery of FP by complaining about noise in a 150MP image. -- Colin (talk) 11:10, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Laitche (talk) 14:47, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Capitolhill_panorama_1.jpg&oldid=163664846"