Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Archbasilica of St. John Lateran HD.jpg

File:Archbasilica of St. John Lateran HD.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 May 2015 at 13:35:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Archbasilica of St. John Lateran HD.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Archbasilica of St. John Lateran HD.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
•  Info All by -- LivioAndronico talk 13:35, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
•  Support -- LivioAndronico talk 13:35, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
•  Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:48, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
•  Question Why such a tight crop (top, both sides)? --Kreuzschnabel 20:57, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

because on the right there was a great advertisement and on the left a stage ... is the union of 10 photos .... for the top honestly I have not noticed. Thank you.--LivioAndronico talk 21:17, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

•  Weak Support. The image quality still has quite a lot of issues (look at the bottom of the image, the grass is hardly even recognisable as grass, it is soft and looks like a watercolour painting (too much noise reduction?). Thankfully, because it is high resolution and stitched, it can be downsampled to a reasonable resolution to look sharper and to minimise the image quality problems. As for the crop, I can understand why you needed to crop it so close on the sides, but it does make the composition feel a bit cramped. Diliff (talk) 08:38, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:41, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:36, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose, sorry, but it needs more space, too tight crop everywhere except at the bottom. --Kadellar (talk) 16:07, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose Nice, but par Kadellar. Yann (talk) 20:13, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:46, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:14, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
•  Support -- exactly the same comments as Diliff. Too much NR. The bottom part is just a mush with no details and unattractive light. I can at least downsize to get the sharpness. -- Colin (talk) 21:24, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
•  Comment Stitching errors, added the notes. --Laitche (talk) 16:39, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

•  Done Thanks --LivioAndronico talk 17:28, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

• A little bit carelessly but OK :) --Laitche (talk) 17:54, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
• I'm learning thanks --LivioAndronico talk 18:09, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

•  Support I understand the reasons for the tight crop; honestly the picture is so well done that this is not a real problem. Daniel Case (talk) 01:30, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Majestic --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 05:04, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
• Weak  Support This picture is way too tight, Livio, this is an issue I see often in your pictures. Let your pictures breath! On the other side the quality is pretty good, probably the best one I have seen here among your works. I also agree with Diliff that that the bottom part (probably through brightening during processing) has little detail but it is IMO not so important for this composition Poco² 08:33, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
•  Support -- Christian Ferrer 21:02, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --Σπάρτακος (talk) 10:56, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 22:14, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places

•  Info Demoted/Delisted to not featured per this consensus. --Cart (talk) 13:32, 18 October 2018 (UTC)