Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Organ chapel royal Versailles.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Organ chapel royal Versailles.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Apr 2011 at 21:14:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info all by me -- Jebulon (talk) 21:14, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Support The organ of the "Chapelle Royale" of the Château de Versailles, as seen from the king's tribune. Further information on file description page.-- Jebulon (talk) 21:14, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Oppose Impressive sharpness as I don't think you were allowed to use tripod there. But still not enough, and the framing doesn't make justice to how beautiful the whole room is (the organ itself seems rather common to me, and I wouldn't look at that first in the chapelle royale). - Benh (talk) 11:48, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Comment. Impressive sharpness BUT not enough. Obviously unfair, but funny. The comment about tripod or not tripod is off subject. Please notice that on this image, one can see the pipes besides the front pipes, even the wooden pipes. No other picture with this detail in "Commons".
- -Does not show how beautiful the whole room is. It is not the subject of this photo, no need (i'm not able for now) to remake a Diliff picture (which does not show the whole room, by the way : where is the very interesting marble floor/ground ? The baroque altar ? ).
- -Furthermore, "beauty of the room" is matter of taste. Saint-Simon wrote: « elle offre de partout la triste représentation d'un catafalque. » ("From everywhere looks sadly like a catafalque")
- -I'm truly sorry for those who find this organ "common". I chose deliberately to show this organ, alone and cropped (not polluted by the altar's sculptures), because it is not common due to a lot of details (in front of the king, above the altar -that is very rare if not unique-, etc etc...) and I wanted to focus about that.
- -When one enter the chapel from the first floor (the vestibule or salon de la chapelle) as I did in this case, indirection to the king's tribune, one is obliged to look at that in first.
- -I think that the visual interaction between the corinthian columns and the vertical pipes is not so bad...--Jebulon (talk) 22:33, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- Not unfair, nor funny. I just mean that the sharpness is impressive because it's likely you took the picture handheld, at 70mm and with a 0.2sec exposure. But still it's not a top notch quality. I don't see what's off here. Also, when I say I wouldn't look at something first, I mean that this is not the part I prefer... I also think the columns are unfortunate here as they hide part of the subject in a rather unpleasant way. Next time I think I'll just oppose without taking the time to justify. - Benh (talk) 08:23, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
- Interesting last sentence... There is another way for the next time : to support !!
.--Jebulon (talk) 09:57, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
- Interesting last sentence... There is another way for the next time : to support !!
- Support Interesting object, nice quality photo -- George Chernilevsky talk 06:39, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:24, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose -- Beautiful composition, the crop doesn't bother me. But the geometric ditortion is distutrbing (it can be corrected though) and the organ could be sharper... Alvesgaspar (talk) 10:40, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
- Comment Sorry, I was not allowed to use a tripod there...
--Jebulon (talk) 13:09, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
- Support -- Albertus teolog (talk) 10:42, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 08:47, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
