Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Stars 01 (MK).jpg

File:Stars 01 (MK).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2014 at 18:35:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Stars 01 (MK).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Stars 01 (MK).jpg

•  Info Starry sky near Brandenburg an der Havel (Germany), close to midnight. The picture shows ~280° of the sky.Selimabner was so kind to add some constelations, stars and planets as annotations which I linked to the german and english article. The orange light in the middle of the image is the visible light polution from Brandenburg which is ~7km away. The bluish light on the left side is the rest light from the sunset. Regards mathias K 18:35, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
•  Support -- mathias K 18:35, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
•  Support I haven't seen a lot of starry skies over here. It definitely has wow factor. I would have loved to know which setting you used to properly review, so I'm wondering if you couldn't have shortened exposition. ISO bumping perhaps? (I'm aware you probably went very high already). Contrary to many pictures on the web, you didn't seem to downscale a lot (if at all), but there might be some little more room for improving noise issue with careful NR. I think stars are good subjects for non too destructive NR. I'll end with composition, which I don't find very sophisticated, but this is just my opinion of course. - Benh (talk) 19:00, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

• Hi Benh, thank you. The single pictures were taken at ISO3200 with f3.5 and 30sec exposure. So yes, there is allready ISO bumping and not much room for shorten the exposition. The high ISO and the open aperture are necessary to catch as much stars as possible at an "acceptable" exposure time. And, I think I have to disappoint you about the downsampling thing. ;-) Cause of the choosen settings I had to downsample a lot to get the actual quality. But with the now given resolution I have made a 120x40cm print were I´m pretty happy with the result, so I think it is a good compromise between size and quality. Regards mathias K 19:54, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

•  Info I've added the camera settings in the image description. --mathias K 10:17, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

•  Support Gefällt mir gut! -- Wolf im Wald 23:35, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
•  Support very nice! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 06:24, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
•  Support Yann (talk) 08:16, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
•  Support Could be nice another version with constellations drawn SVG --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 17:51, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
•  Support—Love, Kelvinsong talk 18:49, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
•  Support and for once light pollution looks nice... It really does add some beauty and colours to the already beautiful photo. --Graphium 03:01, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
•  Support Jacopo Werther ^iγ∂ψ=mψ 08:04, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
•  Comment Nice but there’s a stitching / editing flaw between sagitta and aquila, showing doubled patterns of stars. Tried to squeeze a note in. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 11:47, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

• @Kreuzschnabel: Thanks for the review. As Benh says in another nom: "...reviewers have sharp eyes." ;-) But yes, you're right, there are some double patterns in this area. I don't think it spoils the image that much, but I will try to fix this problem as soon as possible! Thanks again, --mathias K 03:47, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

•  Support --Einstein2 (talk) 16:26, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 21:14, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Astronomy