Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Jersey-city-new-jersy-night.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Image:Jersey-city-new-jersy-night.jpg, not featured[edit]
Nominate
-- Pjotr 20:39, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Pjotr 20:39, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)- Support looks good. --PedroPVZ 23:07, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Support. James F. (talk) 01:40, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- strong
Oppose this picture is overexposed (pure white in the lower left part), it is very noisy, unsharp and has a lot of chromatic aberration arround the ligths. Please see the full size version of this image. Regarding the unsharpness, it is too large and should be resized. Uploading original resolution images made with such cheap cameras is usually not a good idea, because the sensor resolution is much higher than the optical resolution. -- aka
- No, there is no such thing as "too large" for Commons. Please do not spread such disinformation. James F. (talk) 26 June 2005 10:56 (UTC)
- It is too large, because it can be half the size without losing any information due to the bad lens used. You are right - the resolution should be as high as useful possible. But not higher. -- aka 26 June 2005 14:32 (UTC)
- One should always upload the original. Then you can upload a tweaked version on top; but it's important to give the original first. In fact, since Tysto was good enough to put up the original, now anyone can do the resizing you suggest. dbenbenn | talk 27 June 2005 16:09 (UTC)
- Yes, I think the best thing to do would have been to upload the original, and immediately reupload an improved version. Chamaeleon June 27, 2005 18:16 (UTC)
- If the tweaked version does not contain less information (important!) than the original one, then the original version is useless. Thats all I talked about ;) BTW, thanks for improving this image @ Chamaeleon. -- aka 27 June 2005 20:48 (UTC)
- One should always upload the original. Then you can upload a tweaked version on top; but it's important to give the original first. In fact, since Tysto was good enough to put up the original, now anyone can do the resizing you suggest. dbenbenn | talk 27 June 2005 16:09 (UTC)
- It is too large, because it can be half the size without losing any information due to the bad lens used. You are right - the resolution should be as high as useful possible. But not higher. -- aka 26 June 2005 14:32 (UTC)
- No, there is no such thing as "too large" for Commons. Please do not spread such disinformation. James F. (talk) 26 June 2005 10:56 (UTC)
- Oppose blurred, bad composition norro 26 June 2005 11:47 (UTC)
- Support. I've reduced the size and therefore the blur. Chamaeleon June 27, 2005 18:26 (UTC)
- Support Jon Harald Søby\no na 4 July 2005 08:23 (UTC)
- Support -- Schnee 5 July 2005 23:42 (UTC)
- Oppose odd composition, looks somehow cut off at the boddom -- Gorgo 6 July 2005 22:02 (UTC)
- Oppose Doesn't quite do it for me. --Komencanto 8 July 2005 14:13 (UTC)
- Oppose -- Don't like composition and colors Andreas Tille 07:40, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
Result: 6 support, 5 oppose => not featured -- Joolz 01:56, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
