Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Central gate of the Milan Cathedral.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Central gate of the Milan Cathedral.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jun 2013 at 13:09:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created by Kiril Simeonovski - uploaded by Kiril Simeonovski - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:09, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:09, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Oppose A little low technical quality (lack of sharpness). The perspective distortion could be corrected. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:11, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- While I agree the detail on the gate isn't good enough for FP (compare File:Duomo Out S5.jpg), the perspective "distortion" can't be "corrected". The top of the gate is further away and features at the top are observed from below. No mathematical algorithm can change the viewpoint to half-way up the gate or further back. Such software fixes only really work with essentially flat subjects or where the degree of correction required is small. The solution is to take the photograph from futher back (and higher-up if possible), though that isn't easy with a popular tourist spot. And this gate is so detailed, that a stitched image would be beneficial. Colin (talk) 17:32, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose as above. A solution could be using a tilt/shift lens -- Arcalino (talk) 19:35, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- He he. Excuse me for labouring the point but no, that won't help either. Sure, the verticals with be straight and the focus would be sharp from top-to-bottom, but the viewpoint of features towards the top of the image will still be "from below" rather than "straight on". One could probably get away with this for the ironwork of the gate but not the 3D surround. Also, do you realise that your "solution" (T/S lens + full-frame camera) costs approximately 100x the equipment used here? :-) If one can't get further back to take the whole pic straight-on then other ideas are making the perspective a feature (shoot from real close up) to emphasise the height, or just focus on an interesting part of the gate. Colin (talk) 21:30, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- I completely agree with Colin: Artificially rectangulating (is that even a real word?) the gate would certainly do more harm than good. Apart from that, lack of sharpness etc. prevents me from dupporting → Oppose --El Grafo (talk) 11:10, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
