Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Kopenhagen (DK), Opernhaus -- 2017 -- 1638.jpg

File:Kopenhagen (DK), Opernhaus -- 2017 -- 1638.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Aug 2017 at 17:51:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Kopenhagen (DK), Opernhaus -- 2017 -- 1638.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Kopenhagen (DK), Opernhaus -- 2017 -- 1638.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Denmark
•  Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay ^talk 17:51, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- XRay ^talk 17:51, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose - Sorry, high-quality picture, but an obtrusive, almost aggressively uninteresting (to me) subject plus construction to its left is just not wowing to me. This would be a really good VI, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:36, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
•  Support not per Ikan ;-) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:05, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Per Martin. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 09:18, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
•  Neutral The building is very interesting and the quality is high but the angle is uninteresting. I think that a lower angle might have worked better here as it would 'open up' the house a bit. See how it worked for this opera house. The cranes are not on a construction site; that is the shipyard next to the opera. The cranes are permanently fixed on each side of the dock, so not going anywhere soon, they are part of the cityscape. --cart-Talk 10:31, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 20:08, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
• Weak  Oppose. Good light, but compositionally a bit boring. On borderline cases like this, I tend to look towards resolution/quality. I feel like there might be a bit too much water and sky, so there's really only about 10 million high-quality pixels, which isn't enough to push an otherwise marginal image over the edge for an easy-to-take subject like this. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:37, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose per cart. Given that we already have an FP of the front facade, there is a bar to get over, and this angle doesn't do it. Daniel Case (talk) 06:45, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per opposers.--Jebulon (talk) 09:27, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
•  I withdraw my nomination The image looks like no chance for FP. Thanks for all your reviews. --XRay ^talk 15:07, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 01:53, 19 August 2017 (UTC)