Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Stockholms slott December 2012.jpg

File:Stockholms slott December 2012.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2013 at 18:21:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Stockholms slott December 2012.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Stockholms slott December 2012.jpg

•  Info The Royal Palace, Stockholm. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 18:21, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Support -- ArildV (talk) 18:21, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Very good! --Ivar (talk) 19:00, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:11, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose Sorry but the lighting seems a bit strange to me, perhaps even a bit HDR-like. IMO there is too much shadow recovery due to the backlighting. Maybe sunrise and/or a different season would allow for a sidelit picture? --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:51, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
  • hey ,
  • It is a exposure fusion but I think the light is correct, sunset in Stockholm was 14:47 (taken 14:22) and the winter sun is very low so its only indirect sun light in the sky in the image. Exposure fusion (only 3 ev) was used for dark shadows under the bridge and to keep the correct exposure of the sky.-best regards -ArildV (talk) 06:11, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
  • and its not backlighting (sunset and north west west facade )--ArildV (talk) 06:33, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
    • I stand corrected regarding the lighting direction, but what I mean is basically, lack of any direct sunlight on the building. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:55, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Support I see the point that KoH mentioned but for me it isn`t overdone, very close to but overall still good enough for me. --mathias K 14:58, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Support I like it very much, inspite of too much water in foreground maybe (crop out ?)--Jebulon (talk) 16:18, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Support --Joydeep _Talk 17:59, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose Too much brightening of the lower part of the photo imo. — Julian H.^✈(talk/files) 19:34, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose -- Lighting does the scene no favours.Fotoriety (talk) 03:07, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose -- As others have said, poor lighting Pslawinski (talk) 11:16, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Michael Barera (talk) 02:41, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
•  Support maybe lighting not is the better, but atmosphere and view is nice imho --Rjcastillo (talk) 20:22, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Joydeep _Talk 18:09, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture