Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Dans-l-axe.jpg

File:Dans-l-axe.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2010 at 08:59:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Dans-l-axe.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Dans-l-axe.jpg

•  Info created by MirandaAdramin - uploaded by MirandaAdramin - nominated by MirandaAdramin -- The perspective of logging roads from the terrace of Chambord Castle in November. MirandaAdramin (talk) 08:59, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Support -- MirandaAdramin (talk) 08:59, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose An ordinary pic with an interesting framing, badly HDR'd to make it stand out. --MAURILBERT (discuter) 13:29, 3 November 2010 (UTC) Well, let me rephrase that.
  •  Neutral The subject and composition of the picture are interesting ; unfortunately I find it a bit soft and unsharp. The tone-mapping, although decent, looks slightly artificial and CGI-esque. I previously jumped to the conclusion that tone-mapping was used to make this picture more eye-catching and divert attention from the slightly insufficient sharpness - which was unduly critical. --MAURILBERT (discuter) 13:26, 4 November 2010 (UTC) (edit: and the burnt-out white cloud on the left side of the sky is not very good-looking... --MAURILBERT (discuter) 13:30, 4 November 2010 (UTC))
•  Support Not badly HDR'd ;-). Nice shot, not too much HDR. ---donald- (talk) 14:11, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose your tone mapping is very decent - good to see that along with a "hdr" image. although the perspective is interesting i don't like the composition and framing, looks disturbed. please consider working on the CA of your image. regards, PETER WEIS TALK 19:55, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Weak support oppose both - beautiful, obstructing foreground competes with beautiful background and the stone on the bottom is too much. Nah, I can weak support this one, I like the framing. --IdLoveOne (talk) 05:07, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Albertus teolog (talk) 18:13, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Cathy Richards (talk) 17:16, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
  •  Oppose--shizhao (talk) 19:54, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Alt

•  Info perspective and quality corrections by Carschten --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 15:25, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment These changes displace the vanishing point. On the other hand, the shot being taken at 10mm, cropping distorts perspective, ironically (I believe it, but maybe this is subjective). --MirandaAdramin 15:44, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Support --The High Fin Sperm Whale 16:34, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose see above. regards, PETER WEIS TALK 19:55, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose both - beautiful, obstructing foreground competes with beautiful background and the stone on the bottom is too much. --IdLoveOne (talk) 05:07, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Am I missing something, you seem to support the above one. --Elekhh (talk) 00:01, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

•  Oppose Exactly as per IdLoveOne --Jebulon (talk) 15:21, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Mulazimoglu (talk) 08:03, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose--shizhao (talk) 19:53, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
•  Support –hoverFly | chat? 22:31, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:57, 12 November 2010 (UTC)