Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Saslonch dala dlieja da Sacun Gherdëina.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Saslonch dala dlieja da Sacun Gherdëina.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2019 at 13:03:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Italy#Trentino-Alto Adige
Info All by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 13:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 13:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
Oppose. As usual with your panoramas, there is at least one dust spot (on the upper left) and a stitching error (lower right). The frame on the extreme right is visibly less sharp than the others. Also I'm not a fan of the foreground trees that are less sharp than the landscape behind and cover parts I would have liked to see in full. – Lucas 14:15, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
Done I fixed the stitching errors and the ds. Thanks --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 17:20, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry but the light is not good. We have many photos of these impressive mountains, including FPs. Btw, your English description says "Saslonch group" but WP suggests Langkofel Group is the English? -- Colin (talk) 14:34, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
- There are three official names for the group. Ladin:Saslonch, Italian:Sassolungo, German:Langkofel. You can choose whichever you like --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 17:20, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
- You aren't consistent even with your own photographs. Makes it difficult for someone to know if they are looking at the same range. -- Colin (talk) 18:55, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
- Support We do have other FPs of these mountains, but the angle of this one is different enough for me to vote for it. The light is not great, but the resolution certainly is. The right frame is less sharp than the others indeed, but it's OK for me given the size of the panorama. Cmao20 (talk) 16:10, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
- Support Light is not ideal but I like it. It's kind of moody and I like that it gives the same color to the sky and the mountains. The right unsharp frame is alright I think, at 50 % it's not really visible and it still gives us resolution of 22 megapixels. Btw what do you use for removing dust spots? Lightroom has a feature "visualise spots" and it should help you to identify them. I marked a few more dustspots, please remove them :) Regards, --Podzemnik (talk) 20:10, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for the advice. I'll work on it. Normally I look for DSs increasing the contrast on the darker part with command-L and it works pretty well but for DS seekers it's probably not enough ;-). Cheers --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 09:03, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
- Support -- 🇪A〒ℂ🇭A 💬 20:45, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
- Support - FP to me. However, there are still at least 2 dust spots in the dark cloud near the top margin above the area slightly to the right of the right-most peak. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:49, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
- Weak support Per Colin. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 00:51, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
- Support --BoothSift 05:42, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose I would like to see this under better weather/light conditions --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:03, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose A good QI, but I'm not feeling the FP vibe with this light.--Peulle (talk) 12:28, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:53, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose Lighting, per others. Daniel Case (talk) 20:33, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Daniel Case: Please consider that it is North face and in seasons with snow it hardly gets a better lighting. Cheers --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 11:25, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
