Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:БАШНЯ СПАССКАЯ - Torre Spasskaya.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Image:БАШНЯ СПАССКАЯ - Torre Spasskaya.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Mar 2015 at 09:47:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created by Pedro J Pacheco - uploaded by Pedro J Pacheco - nominated by Pedro J Pacheco -- Pedro J Pacheco (talk) 09:47, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Support -- Pedro J Pacheco (talk) 09:47, 18 March 2015 (UTC)- weak --Hubertl (talk) 10:03, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
- Support. --Brateevsky {talk} 10:08, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Oppose - A good composition, somehow spoiled by a bad lighting and poor image quality (unsharpness, lack of detail). Alvesgaspar (talk) 10:40, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
- Are you sure about the "lack of detail"? It's a >23 Megapixel image with pixel-sharpness pretty much everywhere. I'm with you regarding the light, but if this isn't detailed enough, I don't really know what is. — Julian H.✈ 16:02, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
- I will try to rise levels on the wall and tower. About detail, nothing more can I try, but I will. Tonight or tomorrow. Thanks.--Pedro J Pacheco (talk) 17:02, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
- New version available. Not to much differen, but a litle bit detailed. --Pedro J Pacheco (talk) 11:04, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, that introduced a visible white rim/halo along the left side of the roof. --El Grafo (talk) 11:47, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
- Reverted. Thank you very much --Pedro J Pacheco (talk) 17:59, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, that introduced a visible white rim/halo along the left side of the roof. --El Grafo (talk) 11:47, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
- New version available. Not to much differen, but a litle bit detailed. --Pedro J Pacheco (talk) 11:04, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
- I will try to rise levels on the wall and tower. About detail, nothing more can I try, but I will. Tonight or tomorrow. Thanks.--Pedro J Pacheco (talk) 17:02, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
- Are you sure about the "lack of detail"? It's a >23 Megapixel image with pixel-sharpness pretty much everywhere. I'm with you regarding the light, but if this isn't detailed enough, I don't really know what is. — Julian H.✈ 16:02, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
- Support --Tremonist (talk) 15:08, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose Flat light, halo, chromatic aberration in the leaves at left. Excellent composition though. A nice picture, at a bad time.--Jebulon (talk) 17:56, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
- Weak Support. Only the lantern at the left is a bit distorted obviously due to perspective correction. But it is a good composition with good colors and good sharpness. -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 22:18, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose I agree with Jebulon. A very good image, but the lighting prevents it from being truly outstanding. --El Grafo (talk) 10:29, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose IMO the part of the tree at the left is too small and disturbing. Sorry. --XRay talk 21:10, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
