Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Angel on bridge of angels in Rome.JPG

File:Angel on bridge of angels in Rome.JPG, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2014 at 12:13:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Angel on bridge of angels in Rome.JPG Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Angel on bridge of angels in Rome.JPG

573

654

3413

5349

4000

6016

crop suggestion

2667

1988

107

107

4000

6016

Here’s a little something that should be removed

•  Info All by -- LivioAndronico talk 12:13, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
•  Support -- LivioAndronico talk 12:13, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
•  Comment Not too bad. Crop suggestion added, IMHO there’s too much empty space on the left. But apart from that, you may already book some hotels round the corner. --Kreuzschnabel 12:59, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
  •  Done Kreuzschnabel,tell me if is ok now. Thanks. --LivioAndronico talk 14:09, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Much nicer with the crop, the centered composition looked a bit plump.  Support from me now. Nice lighting, and I love the diagonal line of background trees cutting the feet/podium plane. --Kreuzschnabel 20:38, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
      • And now Kreuzschnabel how I do for the party? To few days will born the second daughter and then there's Christmas. Bad bad time, you chose. I Joke, thanks.
• weak  Support No wow but very nice. ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:05, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
  •  Comment ArionEstar If a candidate has 'no wow' for you, then why do you support it? Only 1/4000 images on Commons gets the FP label. ;-) -- Slaunger (talk) 20:51, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
    • @Slaunger: The light, angle and subject are very nice. ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:00, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
      • @ArionEstar: For me that's pretty much the definition of "wow." --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:53, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
        • When I said no wow I do not mean that it is not totally no wow, but it is predominantly no wow. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:26, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
•  Support from me, especially, because its the first picture of a statue from you, where you can see the stone-texture. Its not waxy as most (all?) of your other statue surfaces. All in all, for me its a good composition too.--Hubertl (talk) 16:41, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
•  Neutral I had little expectations after seeing the preview (I do not like frog-perspective on statues), but I am positively surprised by the full resolution. The light is indeed very good on the statue as well as the texture. The diagonal line in the background is a plus. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:56, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Slaunger --LivioAndronico talk 21:21, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

•  Support In addition I like the interplay of light and shadow on the statue.--CHK46 (talk) 21:24, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
•  Support -- ChristianFerrer 17:57, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
•  Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:45, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

* Oppose Bad categorization, insufficient description in the file page.--Jebulon (talk) 22:59, 9 December 2014 (UTC) Far much better now, but beware of overcategorization !--Jebulon (talk) 21:34, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

 Done my dear Jebulon --LivioAndronico talk 23:45, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

•  Support As I've said many times, I just love images with bright light against dark sky. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:53, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
•  Support Excellent and very delicate. I fully agree with King of Hearts, CHK46 and Hubertl. --Jebulon (talk) 21:34, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
•  Support Yann (talk) 10:03, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
•  Support - Very dynamic, very nice. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:50, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
•  Support Brings my soul to the Tiber --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 16:36, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
•  Support --JLPC (talk) 22:10, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Poco² 10:38, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects