Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Sky Garden.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:The Sky Garden.jpg, featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2015 at 19:56:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
- Info The Sky Garden atop the "Walkie-Talkie". Claimed to be London's highest public park, this garden on the top of the highest skyscraper in the City of London has great views. It is freely open to the public, but you have to book three days in advance and pass through airport-style security. This model may help you understand the layout. Unfortunately, the blue-tinted glass on the open air terrace is a photographer's nightmare. All by Colin. -- Colin (talk) 19:56, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
- Support -- Colin (talk) 19:56, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
- Support Nicely done.
You might want to straighten out the right; it's not slanted enough to be artistically distorted IMO, so it might as well be straight.--King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:19, 13 June 2015 (UTC)- King of Hearts, I'm not sure I understand. This isn't a fisheye scene but a regular photograph. The front of the structure is slanted. In fact, the whole building is curved. -- Colin (talk) 20:24, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
- I see. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:06, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
- King of Hearts, I'm not sure I understand. This isn't a fisheye scene but a regular photograph. The front of the structure is slanted. In fact, the whole building is curved. -- Colin (talk) 20:24, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
- Support This is good stuff! There are more challenging locations when it comes to color-tinted glass. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:21, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
- Super strong support Wow in its magnitude. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:58, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
- Comment is the ground supposed to be slanted? The third green pole from the left seems tilted left a bit. If these are actual features of the building, then I'll support. Looks nice. There is a small amount of negligible purple fringing. dllu (t,c) 22:08, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
- dllu, the ground looks fine to me. A horizontal feature in the scene will only render as a horizontal line in the image when it is perpendicular to the camera. The rear wall is not perpendicular to the camera. It is more important to consider vertical lines, and only if they really are vertical and straight. Unfortunately, I have often found that "street furniture" such as poles and lamp posts are rarely as vertical as one might hope, and are often tapered. I'm not sure what the purpose of those thick green poles is, except to hold a small hazard lamp. I don't trust them as much as architectural verticals such as door frames. The image already has the lens-correction profiles in Lightroom, and a very small amount of vertical perspective correction (+3). I have tried tweaking other parameters, but just can't get the poles and the building to agree. I've removed some more purple fringing. -- Colin (talk) 20:06, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
- Support sounds reasonable. dllu (t,c) 21:04, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
- dllu, the ground looks fine to me. A horizontal feature in the scene will only render as a horizontal line in the image when it is perpendicular to the camera. The rear wall is not perpendicular to the camera. It is more important to consider vertical lines, and only if they really are vertical and straight. Unfortunately, I have often found that "street furniture" such as poles and lamp posts are rarely as vertical as one might hope, and are often tapered. I'm not sure what the purpose of those thick green poles is, except to hold a small hazard lamp. I don't trust them as much as architectural verticals such as door frames. The image already has the lens-correction profiles in Lightroom, and a very small amount of vertical perspective correction (+3). I have tried tweaking other parameters, but just can't get the poles and the building to agree. I've removed some more purple fringing. -- Colin (talk) 20:06, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
- Support Good social photo. Too bad cant represent two categories. --Mile (talk) 06:16, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
- Support - Tiptoety talk 07:20, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
- Support — Julian H.✈ 09:53, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
- Support Very good angle. -- Pofka (talk) 10:19, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
- Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:29, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
- Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:25, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
- Support -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 20:11, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
- Support A good picture of a place, but also of opulence. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 21:44, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
- Support -- -donald- (talk) 05:44, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
- Support -- Christian Ferrer 04:44, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
- Support If is good for Christian is good for me --LivioAndronico talk 08:41, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
- Support --Tremonist (talk) 13:45, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
- Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:30, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
- Support Nice angle. --Laitche (talk) 21:38, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
- Support --Ximonic (talk) 00:22, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors