Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Västerlånggatan January 2015.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Västerlånggatan January 2015.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jan 2016 at 10:16:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Info Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 10:16, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Support The street Västerlånggatan in Gamla stan, the old town of Stockholm, Sweden.-- ArildV (talk) 10:16, 24 December 2015 (UTC)I respectfully[changed to
Oppose featuring this,
Neutral, lest my criteria might not be fair] because although the composition is perfectly good, the picture is just too dark. I realize that it's a night picture, and it might have been nearly impossible to use a sufficiently long exposure for good light overall without having huge problems with the lamps, but for whatever it's worth, this is my reaction as a viewer. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:36, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
- Ikan Kekek I respectfully dont understand your review. Did you have decent monitor? Too dark compared to what? Daylight, unnatural overexposed HDR? It is as far as I can see natural light, no black or dark shadows, no details or colours lost, good colours and exposure. More exposure would give an unnatural light. But because you believe that it is too dark, how much lighter do you want the images? It's a city street, not a single building lit by strong lights. it would be unrealistic to make the buildings and street brighter (and also spoil the mood in the picture) --ArildV (talk) 22:47, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
- My monitor is fine and has been quite adequate to view other photos. I think what I'm saying is that in the absence of sufficient light, it just might not be possible to take a photo of that scene that satisfies me. But perhaps that's an unfair point of view, so I'll change my vote to an abstention. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:03, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
- Ikan Kekek I respectfully dont understand your review. Did you have decent monitor? Too dark compared to what? Daylight, unnatural overexposed HDR? It is as far as I can see natural light, no black or dark shadows, no details or colours lost, good colours and exposure. More exposure would give an unnatural light. But because you believe that it is too dark, how much lighter do you want the images? It's a city street, not a single building lit by strong lights. it would be unrealistic to make the buildings and street brighter (and also spoil the mood in the picture) --ArildV (talk) 22:47, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose Nice blue-hour tones, but on the whole I'm not wowed. Daniel Case (talk) 00:01, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose Shame, but the blurred figures are a problem. Charles (talk) 10:00, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose Darkened clipping in some areas, overall relatively usual scene with little visual interest (to me). Regarding the people, I think I'd actually prefer more blur. — Julian H.✈ 10:11, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination Ok, personaly i think this historic street with old buildings in intresting.--ArildV (talk) 10:12, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 11:25, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
