Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Fernsehturm berlin.jpg

Image:Fernsehturm berlin.jpg, not featured

•  Info created by Dontpanic - uploaded by Dontpanic - nominated by Niabot
  Detail shot of the Berlin television tower as seen from the roof of Berlin Cathedral. --Niabot 21:49, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --Niabot 21:49, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Very good quality. /Daniel78 22:30, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --startaq 23:50, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support -- Charlessauer 00:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Neutral quality is pretty much in check, but the subject matter and the way it is captured makes me wonder whether this is truly FP material. --- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 05:47, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support -- MJJR 19:43, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Is there some irony in looking up from a cathedral at the spire of a television tower? Durova 01:15, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

• Indeed – but the persistent cross-shaped sun reflection on that spherical "Sputnik"-structure became famous as the "Pope's revenge". --Dontpanic 09:22, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

•  Oppose - Technical quality is very good, but I can't see this as an FP. Definately QI for technical and value points though. -- Relic38 01:12, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose The quality is good, but the cropping is odd, only showing the top part of the building. Mønobi 15:49, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Wonderful quality --Raminus (talk) 15:52, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose As Relic38. --Karelj 20:36, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --Beyond silence 10:55, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose As stated from the image page, it's composed of six image of each 10 MPixel each, I wonder why the image has been downscaled from that, as this version is less than 10 Mpx. _→AzaToth 14:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

... For the same obvious reason that virtually all stitched images are shrunk: maximum sharpness. The present size is reduced by half from the original shots, resulting in a resolution equal to a 20 megapixel shot. The resultion exceeds 300 dpi at A3 size, which is the maximum resolution used in common lithography even for huge Posters. So it's big. --Dontpanic 20:18, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

FYI: an image doesn't get sharper if you reduce the resolution. _→AzaToth 18:51, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

But i think, that this resolution is far enough and makes a pleasent view at 100% zoom on a display. The larger version would not look so good at 100%. --Niabot 12:48, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

•  Support --Mbdortmund 21:30, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose don't like the crop. Lycaon 12:39, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

• Looking on 200 m of solid concrete would not make a better image. --Niabot 12:45, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

• Don't get me wrong, quality of pic is good enough, and crop is sufficient for an illustration of the tip of this tower, but not for FP, IMO. Lycaon 12:55, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

•  Oppose i think this has really a top quality, but i dont see how such an image can be FP. it misses that "wow" factor. -LadyofHats 02:30, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
•  Support. Those who object to the "cropping" evidently have not been to Berlin. :-) James F. (talk) 12:42, 9 March 2008 (UTC) Voting was closed. Lycaon 12:52, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose I quote Relic38. RedWine 20:44, 9 March 2008 (UTC)Voting was closed. Lycaon 21:45, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

result: 9 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Mywood 09:49, 10 March 2008 (UTC)