Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sand sculpture - Puerto de Mogan.jpg

File:Sand sculpture - Puerto de Mogan.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2017 at 09:49:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Sand sculpture - Puerto de Mogan.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sand sculpture - Puerto de Mogan.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
•  Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 09:49, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- Llez (talk) 09:49, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support refreshingly different --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:30, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Nice, something new here. Maybe a low level view could be more interesting with the sky on top --The Photographer 12:26, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Info It was at a popular beach. In the background there was no sky, but hundreds of bathing people. --Llez (talk) 14:38, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:39, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
• You might try diorama here. --Mile (talk) 13:07, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 14:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Neutral Very nice image. But IMO it is a non permanent art work and this is not FoP in Spain. --XRay ^talk 19:20, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

•  Support because it's very nice. --XRay ^talk 07:17, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

•  Support @XRay: In general, works that are designed to be naturally destroyed by the elements are considered permanent. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:42, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

But what if that guy from the Charles Atlas ads comes across it on the beach and kicks it into dust? Would that make it temporary? Daniel Case (talk) 04:37, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

•  Comment I do not fancy the angle too much, but won't oppose either as it is refreshing. As The Photographer suggest a photo taken from a lower level would have been more interesting. I realize it was a busy beach, but I think an interesting position would have been to get the camera to the ground level, put on a zoom or a macro lens and make a detail shot of some of the sand houses showing just the sand castle elements with no traces of the normal beach and background. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:13, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support - Composition is pretty good in my opinion, but I'm supporting this mainly for uniqueness, though of course the picture quality is high, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:22, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support lNeverCry 21:29, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:05, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Clear depiction of a very interesting subject -- Thennicke (talk) 02:58, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support I prefer this AOV here as it cover a lot of details which we will miss in a lower position of the camera. This looks like an areal view of a castle. The light is harsh; but I can understand as it is from a beach. Jee 04:03, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 05:23, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Jacopo Werther ^iγ∂ψ=mψ 13:00, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 19:09, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Mö1997 (Questions ?!?!) 19:36, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 19:56, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- Reguyla (talk) 21:45, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:15, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /lNeverCry 22:03, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects