Commons:Valued image candidates/Fogbow spectre and glory filtered.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Fogbow spectre and glory filtered.jpg

undecided
Image
Nominated by Mbz1 on 2008-03-11 15:18 (UTC)
Scope Nominated as the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
the concurrent observation of Solar glory, Brocken spectre and Fog bow.
Used in Global usage
Review
(criteria)
  •  Comment This is an interesting stress test because the same image is nominated as the most valued within three different scopes. The outcome may be that it is found to be the most valued within one or more scope but not in others. This gives an unclear result. I have started a thread about this principal discussion here. I suggest we put this nomination on hold until a consensus about this principal matter is found. -- Slaunger 20:39, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment (Sorry for the delay). OK, the idea of the nominator was that the image is the best at showing all three atmospheric phenomena together, so I think the review can be resumed. -- Slaunger 12:52, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment My first feeling when looking at the image was: confusion. Especially, the red structures in the lower left corner confused me. However, when studying the article for glory I saw there was a related images where more is seen of the golden gate bridge, thus helping to set the stage for the viewer. So actually I think that is a better candidate, and I suggest you change the nominated image to that one (and if you feel differently: we could make a comparison review by moving both to a Most Valued Review to get the opinion from other reviewers). Next, I have tried to relate your image to the descriptions of the three atmospheric phenomena you mention in the nomination. Concerning glory and fog bow, I think the image is a good concurrent illustration of these two phenomena. When it comes to the Brocken spectre I am more in doubt. In my opinion one should clearly see a "shadow" of some object in apparent exaggerated size, be it a bridge structure or the photographer and that shadow is not very clear for me. Am I misunderstanding that phenomenon? Last but not least I admire of your ability to photograph these phenomena. I recently tried to capture a lunar fog bow and that did not work out - at all, so I know it is not easy. -- Slaunger 15:11, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Thank you for your comment, Slaunger. It does make sense. The image is very confusing.
Result: Withdrawn =>
Declined. -- Slaunger 20:52, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Declined -> undecided by the end of test review phase. -- Slaunger 20:20, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]