Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Concordiatempelagrigent3 retouched.jpg

Image:Concordiatempelagrigent3 retouched.jpg, not featured

•  Info created by Matthias Süßen - uploaded by Matthias Süßen - nominated by Matthias Süßen -- Matthias Süßen (talk) 22:52, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Support -- Matthias Süßen (talk) 22:52, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Support--Sensl (talk) 00:25, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Jennavecia ^(Talk) 03:51, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --Reflection of Perfection (talk) 04:43, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Support so ist es --Böhringer (talk) 09:00, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose Underexposed, blurry, CA. –Dilaudid 09:42, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose Too blurry for FP --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 10:40, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose Disagree with choice of focal length for such big buildings. I prefer if it would be closer to natural eye vision (50/55). 28 mm makes artificial distortion (and perspective correction would seem artificial too). This means it would have been probably necessary to stitch 2 or 3 pictures. I also find composition too poor. Wasn't it possible to take one of the almond trees around as a foreground ? --B.navez (talk) 14:13, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose As above - blurry. --Karelj (talk) 16:12, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Support I like the composition, a tree in the foreground might be too disctracting. The choice of the focal length is imposed by the location, the temple is on a hill and moving farther away would lead to a view from a still lower position, leading to a less impressive view. --Bjs (talk) 16:03, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Support I like this shot very much. If someone can provide us with a higher quality image, we can delist this, but I think the composition and the choice of lighting is very good. --Specious (talk) 07:33, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose -- I think its too unsharp, mainly the left part, and "washed out" Manuel R. (talk) 16:54, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Support--Avala (talk) 21:16, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Support -- Radbod
•  Oppose Not crisp enough. Lycaon (talk) 16:50, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose as above --Base64 (talk) 13:54, 28 August 2008 (UTC)Out of date. --Tintero (talk) 18:12, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

result: 9 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 19:36, 28 August 2008 (UTC)