Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Gorizia - Duomo di Gorizia - 2023-09-03 21-21-16 001.jpg

File:Gorizia - Duomo di Gorizia - 2023-09-03 21-21-16 001.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2023 at 20:31:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Gorizia - Duomo di Gorizia - 2023-09-03 21-21-16 001.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Gorizia - Duomo di Gorizia - 2023-09-03 21-21-16 001.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Italy
•  Info The cathedral of Gorizia was built in the 11th century and rebuilt in the 14th century. It suffered serious damage during the First World War and was refurbished in 1928, but, it was not put back in the same way it was before. Rather it shows Central European influences, as if to demonstrate that this was not just a local church, but one of all. In 2025, almost 100 years later, Gorizia (Italy) will be the European capital of culture together with the modern city of Nova Gorica (Slovenia).
  created by Terragio67 - uploaded by Terragio67 - nominated by Terragio67 -- Terragio67 (talk) 20:31, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 20:31, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Support ★ 21:09, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Support - ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 15:26, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Neutral The surfaces have a washed out look, I think too much denoise was applied or the highlights were turned down too much. This category is unfortunately a higher standard due to the number of featured images in this theme --Wilfredor (talk) 17:19, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

  Thank you for your comment regarding the Cathedral of Gorizia.

  The washed-out vision issue was related to image acquisition (due to my previous decision). I decided to recover the image from the RAW file (DPP4 Canon) changing the profile from 'Neutral' to 'Fine'. Then, I enlarged the crop to the maximum allowed... Now the image should be more defined and less plasticky...

  Let me know please... (remember to delete the browser's cache) Terragio67 (talk) 21:09, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose When I looked down the nave, I was thinking this was an FP, but I don't like the sides, especially the left side, which are unsharp and noisy. Of course I know that there is a degree of loss of focus at the edges of the lens, but we've seen better sides than this. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:43, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose not too keen on the camera put on (or very close to) the floor as this makes the benches unnecessarily prominent and a bit off-putting in my view. - Benh (talk) 12:39, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

  I totally understand your point of view. It must be considered that it is a difficult place to take photographs due to the very strong front and side-lights which unfortunately disturbs the most interesting parts.

  Therefore, there were two reasons that led me to choose to lower the position of the camera on the tripod to 60 cm. There are 8 side windows (4+4) on the ground floor and as many on the upper floor, so, lowering myself I protected the room from light disturbances that cannot be corrected in post-production, secondly it seemed nice to give the central perspective with the historic wooden benches as a guide towards the altar.

  Thanks for your detailed review. Terragio67 (talk) 13:19, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose Per others. - -Karelj (talk) 16:56, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per Ikan.--Liridon (talk) 08:45, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
•  I withdraw my nomination
  For me it is important to clearly understand where there were problems in the photo to improve.
  Thank you very much for yours detailed evaluations. --Terragio67 (talk) 16:42, 9 September 2023 (UTC)