Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Scots' Church Interior 1, Melbourne, Australia - Diliff.jpg

File:Scots' Church Interior 1, Melbourne, Australia - Diliff.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 May 2019 at 18:09:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Scots' Church Interior 1, Melbourne, Australia - Diliff.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Scots' Church Interior 1, Melbourne, Australia - Diliff.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
•  Info The interior of Scots' Church, Melbourne, Australia, as viewed from the rear of the church looking toward the altar. The current church was constructed between 1871 and 1874, and was built with the intention of being the "most beautiful building in Australia". The interior features basalt aisle columns, a set of stained-glass windows depicting the Last Supper and other scenes, and a timber-beamed roof. Created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 18:09, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 18:09, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose I think the view from higher up, on the balcony, is superior: File:Scots' Church Interior 2, Melbourne, Australia - Diliff.jpg. Less vertical angle-of-view so less vertical perspective effects such as making the roof look stretched. You also see more from that position. -- Colin (talk) 18:56, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

• Fair enough - I know you tend not to like it when these pictures include too much vertical field of view, and I can understand. I did see that one as well but thought I'd go for this because I suspected some people might oppose the other because of the slight distortion of the bottom corners. We'll give it a go if this one doesn't pass. Cmao20 (talk) 19:34, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

• I know some people think an Alt should just be for a different crop/processing of same image, but I'd be tempted to try an Alt for the balcony view. Might be simpler to let folk choose which they prefer, and I don't think both should be featured. -- Colin (talk) 21:46, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

•  Support -- Piotr Bart (talk) 19:24, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:46, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

• @George Chernilevsky, Piotr Bart, and Colin: At Colin's suggestion, please see the alternative below. Cmao20 (talk) 22:21, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Alternative, featured

•  Support As Colin suggests above, I have added the view from higher up on the balcony as an alternative. I agree that both images should not be featured as they essentially depict the same scene. Personally I actually prefer this one too - it has a bit more 'wow factor' and is a more unusual perspective than the classic shot - but let's see what people think. Cmao20 (talk) 22:18, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 02:01, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support ― Gerifalte _Del Sabana 02:55, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 03:28, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 04:02, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:03, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support - I prefer the alternative because I feel like the light from the windows is better handled from this angle. I also mildly prefer the longer sightline down the nave and the greater perception of the overall form of the interior. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:31, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- Colin (talk) 07:05, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:51, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support I prefer this version --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:25, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support Poco² 12:48, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 13:52, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:14, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support Different from David's usual angles. Daniel Case (talk) 18:56, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 19:13, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:31, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:40, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --BoothSift 04:13, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support Solid FP --Wilfredor (talk) 22:14, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /– Lucas 21:09, 3 May 2019 (UTC))

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings

The chosen alternative is: File:Scots'_Church_Interior_2,_Melbourne,_Australia_-_Diliff.jpg