Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Stadion słubice 2.JPG

File:Stadion słubice 2.JPG, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2009 at 19:33:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Stadion słubice 2.JPG Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Stadion słubice 2.JPG

•  Info created by Fsopolonezcaro - uploaded by Fsopolonezcaro - nominated by Tomem -- Tomem (talk) 19:33, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support very good photo, nice object in beautiful city! -- Tomem (talk) 19:33, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Blown sky, fringe around the crown of the trees, some noise (esp. under the arches and in the grass in the foreground), lack of "depth" in dynamic range (there's no true black, even in the shadows of the trees ?!), shallow sharpness. And it is tilted clockwise. A good picture, very suitable for documentary purposes, yet not an FP. --MAURILBERT (discuter) 01:27, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

• In different browsers this picture is displayed differently. The best quality is in Internet Explorer or Safari. This stadium is a very important monument so purely object is more important than the grass or the environment. I made a few small patches and now graphics isn't so noisy. --Tomem (talk) 15:57, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Do you mean because of color profiles ? Looks exactly the same in IE and Opera for me. /Daniel78 (talk) 22:21, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

•  Oppose Even if the sky is not the main subject, it should not be blown in a FI. --99of9 (talk) 01:41, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Noisy. /Daniel78 (talk) 22:21, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose as above --Leafnode 07:12, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Extremly low quality, uninteresting composition --S23678 (talk) 01:40, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose While there's nothing wrong with the image, it neither has great photographic technical merits, nor provokes any great interest for the user. I am inclined to let slight imperfections pass if the image type/subject is rare or usually hard to get a decent image (a performing musician/unrepeatable stunt), however I feel on this occassion a better image could be attained. Mtaylor848 (talk) 23:28, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /JovanCormac 06:47, 29 October 2009 (UTC)