Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:DHAB-BRIDGE OVER CANAL & GATE (DAY VIEW).jpg

File:DHAB-BRIDGE OVER CANAL & GATE (DAY VIEW).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Apr 2023 at 16:32:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:DHAB-BRIDGE OVER CANAL & GATE (DAY VIEW).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:DHAB-BRIDGE OVER CANAL & GATE (DAY VIEW).jpg

10368

1056

528

720

12000

7246

Geometrically impossible overlapping

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Computer-generated#Other
•  Info created & uploaded by Dhabahawalpur - nominated by Q28 -- Q28 (talk) 16:32, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Q28 (talk) 16:32, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment Can we get a bit more of an explanation of what exactly we are seeing here and a few more appropriate categories, please? --Kritzolina (talk) 19:40, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

  Thank you, W.carter, for fixing those issues! Kritzolina (talk) 18:30, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose for now, at least, because of the weird slant of the gate. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:18, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose 3rd rate computer design. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:13, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose unnatural colours. --SHB2000 (talk) 01:12, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment Contains at least one geometrically impossible overlapping (top right, see image note) – is this a tribute to M.C. Escher? ;–) And why would anybody want to build such a big road and bridge when the road ends abruptly at the wood (top left)? --Aristeas (talk) 05:45, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose There are several issues. The grass is simulated with some grass textures that sometimes don't fit in with the environment. The trees are sprites. This can work, but due to the perspective, it sometimes seems unrealistic. The physics are not rendered correctly. Sometimes shadows are missing, the car in the background is floating. On the car of the right, there are some weird areas (reflections?). The water seems quite unsharp compared to the environment, and also seems to have a low resolution. The backgrounds far away seem to be foggy, but there is not gradient where the fog seems to increase with a further distance. The arrows in the street are 3D dimensional. This could be problematic in reality :). Some transitions of plants are unrealistic (like used a stamp effect in photoshop). Some trees seem to have transparency issues. And the streets in the background seems to lead into the trees. There might be some other issues, but all in all, it seems not to meet the criteria to be promoted as FP, sorry --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 12:42, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose looks unnatural, i can't do anything with this picture --Killarnee (talk) 20:50, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:48, 20 April 2023 (UTC)