Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ciudad del Cabo desde Cabeza de León, Sudáfrica, 2018-07-22, DD 20-23 PAN.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Ciudad del Cabo desde Cabeza de León, Sudáfrica, 2018-07-22, DD 20-23 PAN.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Aug 2018 at 13:51:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
Info Panoramic view of Cape Town viewed from Lion's Head, South Africa. All by me, Poco2 13:51, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Support -- Poco2 13:51, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Comment I´m not sure about horizon alignment. It's too straight considering that the mountains in the distance seem actually to become higher from left to right.--Milseburg (talk) 19:13, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- I'm not sure about your comment, Milseburg, looking at the bottom half of the images buildings look fine. Do you expect more inclination of the horizon? should the left are be higher or lower? I haven't edited the image after the stitching --Poco2 07:45, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- I would expect the horizon to increase from left to right in the distance with the mountains. At present, the distant mountains in the middle part of the picture appear at the same elevation as the lower mountains on the left. In this picture, the course of the horizon is more natural for me. On the other hand, in this one the horizon looks similary arched. --Milseburg (talk) 10:11, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- Ok, I understand what you talk about now, Milseburg, but I don't believe that this is a problem. The image that you say looks good is a portion of the others and in that area the mountains in the back are actually higher that those being closer. But that does not apply (and it is consistent) to the mountains in the area over Signal hill and further to the left. I'm always willing to improve my pictures but to be honest I don't think there is any problem here. I checked other panoramic views from that spot in the Internet and I cannot see a problem comparing to this or this one. --Poco2 14:50, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- The "quality" of the other panos you mentioned are out of question, but a FP need a correct horizon. See here, how it is calculated by peakfinder. In comparison, the horizon in your pano is bent slightly down to the right. By the way it would be nice, if you could add the coordinates and direction of viewing to your image. --Milseburg (talk) 18:57, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- Ok, I understand what you talk about now, Milseburg, but I don't believe that this is a problem. The image that you say looks good is a portion of the others and in that area the mountains in the back are actually higher that those being closer. But that does not apply (and it is consistent) to the mountains in the area over Signal hill and further to the left. I'm always willing to improve my pictures but to be honest I don't think there is any problem here. I checked other panoramic views from that spot in the Internet and I cannot see a problem comparing to this or this one. --Poco2 14:50, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- I would expect the horizon to increase from left to right in the distance with the mountains. At present, the distant mountains in the middle part of the picture appear at the same elevation as the lower mountains on the left. In this picture, the course of the horizon is more natural for me. On the other hand, in this one the horizon looks similary arched. --Milseburg (talk) 10:11, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- I'm not sure about your comment, Milseburg, looking at the bottom half of the images buildings look fine. Do you expect more inclination of the horizon? should the left are be higher or lower? I haven't edited the image after the stitching --Poco2 07:45, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
*--Milseburg (talk) 11:34, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Oppose for now.- Milseburg yes, the horizon was not straight, or better said the image was tilted. I applied a 0,5 degree tilt. Not sure whether that mitigates your concerns. I also added metadata (template location), what do you mean with "direction of viewing"? which template do you use for that? --Poco2 19:19, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
- Horizon looks natural now. Thank you for adding the coordinates. I think we see in your panorama in eastern directions. So you could add
{{Location | -33.9359879 | 18.3898028 | heading: 90}}The number refers to the center of the image. With panoramas you always look in several directions. Therefore, it is good for a better comprehension also to specify the angle of the perspective in the description. Maybe others also expect the panorama template{{Panorama |1= |2=|3=}}. But my point was the horizon. Support now. I hope to be there someday and making photos too. --Milseburg (talk) 15:04, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks for your feedback, Milseburg. I added the heading to the location template. --Poco2 18:38, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
- Horizon looks natural now. Thank you for adding the coordinates. I think we see in your panorama in eastern directions. So you could add
- Weak support I wondered how long it would be after Wikimania before we started seeing pictures like this (I've uploaded some too, so far from the hotel roof). I'll reserve judgement on the horizon question, and it's wonderfully detailed; I think I can find my hotel (the other one, not the conference hotel). However, I do wish that distracting shadow of Lion's Head itself weren't there. Daniel Case (talk) 05:49, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 18:03, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- Support --Dэя-Бøяg 01:36, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 10:38, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
