Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ferrocarril Swakopmund-Walvis Bay, Namibia, 2018-08-05, DD 03.jpg

File:Ferrocarril Swakopmund-Walvis Bay, Namibia, 2018-08-05, DD 03.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Apr 2019 at 18:37:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Ferrocarril Swakopmund-Walvis Bay, Namibia, 2018-08-05, DD 03.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ferrocarril Swakopmund-Walvis Bay, Namibia, 2018-08-05, DD 03.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles
•  Info Cargo train pulled by a South African Class 33-400 locomotive in the route Swakopmund-Walvis Bay, Namibia. All by me, Poco² 18:37, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- Poco² 18:37, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Basotxerri (talk) 19:06, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Milan Bališin (talk) 20:03, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose. It doesn't work for me with the train being too small, part of the background and too much ground visible in the foreground without any clear subjects there. It feels like a too wide focal length was used without enough in the frame to compensate and both the train and horizon on center height doesn't help that feeling. File:NSB Di 4 Nattog Saltfjellet.jpg does all these things much better in comparison. – Lucas 21:39, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:51, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Lucas. -- Karelj (talk) 22:03, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per Lucas as well. --BoothSift 23:31, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Support I like the composition; it's nicely balanced with the symmetry between the land and the sky each covering around 50% of the frame. I don't find the picture boring or lacking in a subject. Cmao20 (talk) 13:08, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Neutral To me this composition is random. As said above, the train seems to be part of the background and there's too mouch in the background spilling endless against the horizon. It would be more reasonable for me to cut off the right part to take the extreme depth of the photo.--Der Angemeldete (talk) 16:44, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Comment @Basotxerri, Milan Bališin, Lucasbosch, Michielverbeek, and Karelj: @Boothsift, Cmao20, and Der Angemeldete: there's a new crop...--Poco² 18:36, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

•  Comment Still OK for an FP. --Basotxerri (talk) 18:45, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
• Thanks for notifying. Doesn't affect my support. Cmao20 (talk) 18:47, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
• It improved my pain points, but not quite enough, especially in thumbnail sizes. – Lucas 18:53, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
• I disagree. In thumbnail size it looks better than I thought it would. But still it's hard for me to focus on the main subject. I changed to neutral. For comparison.--Der Angemeldete (talk) 19:43, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

•  Comment Der Angemeldete If you display another photo in the nom, it will be understood as an "Alt" by FPC Bot and it will mess up the closing later. Please only mention other photos, we are quite capable of clicking on them and look at the file. Also please write the whole "neutral" or the Bot will not be able to read the vote. I have fixed it for you. (Yes, the Bot and its shortcomings is a bit frustrating, but we will have to live with it.) Thanks. --Cart (talk) 21:56, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

@W.carter: Alright, thank you for the hint.--Der Angemeldete (talk) 22:14, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

•  Comment Still a FP for me --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:52, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

•  Oppose per other opposers. The train just doesn't stand out enough in the compo. A more radical angle would have been better. Sorry, --Cart (talk) 19:35, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 03:31, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose The train is too small. This photo would be better If shoot close in on the train(in...in...big...big). or On the other side of the railroad tracks showing only the landscape. Bayoustarwatch (talk) 14:38, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

•  Comment - Lest there be any objection to this vote, Bayoustarwatch now has well over 50 edits. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:18, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

•  Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 09:57, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Support I support due to the composition. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 12:28, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --PierreSelim (talk) 10:26, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 08:28, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 18:43, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Hockei (talk) 20:55, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --EATCHA (talk) 11:16, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:27, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles