Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Rådhuset metro station December 2016.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

File:Rådhuset metro station December 2016.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jan 2017 at 09:18:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Rådhuset metro station, Stockholm. Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  •  Info Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 09:18, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- ArildV (talk) 09:18, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Having seen this view a thousand times on my way to work, it has never look as good as in this photo, and yet nothing is added or changed. Well done! --cart-Talk 09:25, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Exposure was too short. The level of blur of the train is disturbing and not well handled. lNeverCry 09:28, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Info for non-Swedes about the choice of artwork at this station: "Rådhuset" means Town Hall/Rathaus and the partial pillars are symbolizing the ancient foundation for the building above. cart-Talk 09:33, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  strong support what a great picture of a truly wonderfully designed station! Personally I'd prefer longer exposures but that's just a matter of taste. 1/15 works as well as it provides a better idea and more details of the moving train. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:01, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose We have another Featured by you from the same point of view and IMHO better quality --The Photographer 10:03, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Comment I think it is 2 very different images, due to the different focal length. Regarding the quality, I believe the quality to be good considering that it is a uncompressed 24mp extreme wide-angle image.--ArildV (talk) 10:53, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm also not sure about the two noms. I think, ArildV, you should have stated the other nom up-front. The previous FP has a slight horizontal-perspective issue (see the escalator lights) but handles the lighting highlights better. It is also better for having some people on the escalator, imo. Both have a similar amount of roof, but this one has more of the black floor, which isn't very interesting. The escalator here isn't quite centred in the frame. The train adds a little bit, but essentially we just have the same photo zoomed out a little bit. I would encourage you to consider a 16:9 crop (see note on file page) which will centre the escalator, remove some of the floor, has the floor lines lead in from the corners, and has a more dramatic format imo. -- Colin (talk) 11:18, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I didn't know about the other FP. Hmmm. I don't know why you shoot and nominate the same subject for FP with only some slight difference and not even in the "set way" where several shots of a subject makes sense. Wouldn't it be more productive to move on and shoot another location? I won't change my vote, but I agree with Colin that you should have declared the other photo in the nom and explained why you think we should have these two versions of the same view. --cart-Talk 15:40, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It is vey simple, I thought (and think) it was a different images with different focus (more of the station and train, IMO also a more dynamic composition with the lines (train, and the lines in the floor). You can of course disagree. The previous FP was no secret, it was a finalist in last year's POY and I hope you are not suggesting that I tried to hide it consciously.
Wouldn't it be more productive to move on and shoot another location?
First: I am not employed by you or WMF for taking pictures. I am a volunteer and do not need to be extremly productive. Furthermore, I believe that it is good to have many images of an object taken during different seasons. I wish all small villages to be as well-documented as Ljungdalen, all the islands as well documented as Landsort and all metro stations as well documented as Rådhuset. I have limited time and often have a camera in my bag, and take photos of the places I visit anyway.
W.carter: Regarding Landsort; the last nomination from 2016 was from another user. The another from 2013 and 2012.
--ArildV (talk) 09:47, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for your explanation, it clarified things. --cart-Talk 10:07, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • ArildV, I wasn't suggesting you "tried to hide [the previous nom] consciously" but even a POTY finalist can be unknown to people who only joined recently, and not everyone will remember the photo as well as you remember your own. It is best to be "up front" about this, so avoid the situation where a similar photo is pointed out only after several people have supported. -- Colin (talk) 10:18, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /lNeverCry 03:24, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Rådhuset_metro_station_December_2016.jpg&oldid=228470501"