Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Mallorca - Kathedrale von Palma1.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Mallorca - Kathedrale von Palma1.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2014 at 19:53:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Info all by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 19:53, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
- Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 19:53, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
- Support Wohow! ArionEstar (talk) 21:05, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
- Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 21:51, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
- Support --Halavar (talk) 22:41, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
- Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:07, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose the "shadow side" of the building. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 06:08, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
- It's definitly not. The building was indeed illuminated by the sun. Maybe this impression accures because of jagged front. --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:12, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose for now. Very harsh light. Can you make it softer? --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:37, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
- It's rather paradox. You think the light is harsh, Alchemist means the church is partially in shadow. I think the light shows the cathedral in a good and interessting way. --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:49, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
- Comment Very impressive view, composition, and size (I did not find any stitching error). Some "rework" in the sky is visible -artefacts- (I know how it is difficult to manage this). The contrasts of some parts of the building and vegetation are not the same everywhere (some parts look like "dusty" and pale). But it can be corrected and we already have promoted worst pictures than this one, IMO...--Jebulon (talk) 09:54, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
- The few "dusty" areals are no fault of the stitching or a sign of bad processing. The sun was shing very strong this day and there are some interference. This phenomenon you can find also in my single shots of this church (e.g. File:Mallorca - Kathedrale von Palma6.jpg). I understand if you oppose because of this but I don't think it's thatmost disturbing. A similar physical effect you can see on this image File:Toronto - ON - Schaft des CN Tower.jpg which is for sure actually interessting. So: nothing correctable here because it's just nature. --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:54, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose Retouching marks on the sky, unnatural low contrast areas. --Ivar (talk) 16:35, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
- As there wasn't any retouching on the sky the are for sure no retouching marks. No need to invent reason. If you don't like it just oppose. --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:49, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry, but iifar is right, it may be retouching marks or colour banding but the problem is in the end the same. There were similar issues on one of your FPC's some weeks ago, I set image notes, but you ignored. --A.Savin 09:13, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
- There wasn't any retouching. Thank you. --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:47, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry, but iifar is right, it may be retouching marks or colour banding but the problem is in the end the same. There were similar issues on one of your FPC's some weeks ago, I set image notes, but you ignored. --A.Savin 09:13, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
- As there wasn't any retouching on the sky the are for sure no retouching marks. No need to invent reason. If you don't like it just oppose. --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:49, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose per Alchemist, the sun seems to be on your right and not behind you, it would even be better on the left later during the day. And per Ivar, the shadowed areas in the upper parts are not very dark (low contrast areas) -- Christian Ferrer Talk 23:12, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
- As I already wrote. This are not low contrast areas but this is nature. --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
- Support Ю. Данилевский (talk) 08:53, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
- Support Jiel (talk) 09:47, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
- Support Great impressive motif. The light is not perfect but not too bad either. -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 20:34, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
- Weak Oppose Maybe there was no retouching but there is pixelation in the sky with ares abruptly darker. I also agree with the comments regarding improvable lighting and lack of contrast, but both are still acceptable to me. Will support if the problems in the sky are addressed. Poco2 17:37, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose Not the best lighting. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:17, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
Confirmed results: