Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Monumento a la Libertad, Riga, Letonia, 2012-08-07, DD 13.JPG
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Monumento a la Libertad, Riga, Letonia, 2012-08-07, DD 13.JPG, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2013 at 20:26:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info Freedom monument, Riga, Latvia. All by me, Poco a poco (talk) 20:26, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:26, 14 January 2013 (UTC)- Support --Suid-Afrikaanse (talk) 01:40, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Comment Some noise in the sky, left part of the image tilted CW?--ArildV (talk) 07:34, 15 January 2013 (UTC)- Support--ArildV (talk) 10:28, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support --cyrfaw (talk) 07:35, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support - imo, for a long exposure evening shot the noise is at acceptable level. The blue hour atmosphere is captured perfectly. FP to me. --A.Savin 13:43, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
- I uploaded a new version with noise reduction and a slight perspective correction Poco a poco (talk) 18:57, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you.--ArildV (talk) 10:28, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support Béria Lima msg 15:58, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support -- Joydeep Talk 17:32, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Oppose Overexposed and the tree on the right bothers me.--Telemaque MySon (talk) 18:44, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
- According to the histogramm there are no overepoxed areas, where do you see a problem (apart from light sources)? Poco a poco (talk) 18:57, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry was oversaturated, and some color range with much more light than what I would expect. It is maybe not burned in the histogram, but it does not look very natural to me.--Telemaque MySon (talk) 10:19, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support --Kadellar (talk) 21:57, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
- weak oppose Nice lightning and mood. But for my sensation the composition is a bit imbalanced, but main reason for "oppose" is the massive motion blur at the trees at the right front (it's not a small area in the background it's in the foreground). It looks more than a painting than a photo there. You had better wait for a windless moment. --Tuxyso (talk) 22:42, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose Oversaturated. -- -donald- (talk) 09:23, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose Doesn't look natural IMO due to oversaturation. Maire (talk) 14:11, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
New version uploaded with moderate saturation Poco a poco (talk) 20:39, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose This image could better be taken at daytime, thus avoiding unnecessary motion blurring in the trees, various ghosts and a very artificial feel. Kleuske (talk) 14:13, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support --Алый Король (talk) 06:13, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose Artificial colors, motion blur on trees. --Vamps (talk) 19:43, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
- If there wasn't motion blur, all critics would say "noisy" because of a short exposure. The daytime picture would be simply different. With five seconds you really need no wind at all. --Kadellar (talk) 19:54, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose Per donald. --Selbymay (talk) 12:33, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
Neutral I really-really like the mood of the image and overall colors but when looking fine details then... Kruusamägi (talk) 19:58, 18 January 2013 (UTC)- Support I like it. Michael Barera (talk) 00:58, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose nice, but oversaturated. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:46, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
- Desaturated I believe that nobody else should affirm now that it is oversaturated. Would be great to get some feedback from any of the 5 colleagues declining for this reason Poco a poco (talk) 10:24, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 06:06, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose It still looks well oversaturated to me. Maybe this is why they haven't changed their vote. --99of9 (talk) 03:23, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 9 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 06:36, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
