Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Basilique St Maximim La Sainte Baume.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Basilique St Maximim La Sainte Baume.jpg, not featured
[edit]
Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2009 at 18:32:24
Info created by Esby - uploaded by ? - nominated by Yann (talk) 18:32, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Support -- Yann (talk) 18:32, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Too distorted (see the top of the image). Also quite noisy. /Daniel78 (talk) 20:36, 4 July 2009 (UTC)- Oppose Great lighting, really impressive, but unfortunately the front part is far too distorted, and the center lacks sharpness. -- H005 (talk) 21:55, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
- Support Sharpness, noise, stitching, ... everything has become much better since the previous version. -- H005 (talk) 13:19, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose noisy.--Mbz1 (talk) 23:27, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
- '
Comment I did two new versions, I changed the projection angle a bit and I added a colored version to show how the panorama was made. Enfused images were also used to make both new version. Dunno if this might be enough or not, now this might be ok for making the sets as 'VI' (since it explains how the images are stitched together).
See template:St Maximim - Hugin for more details about that. Esby (talk) 10:31, 5 July 2009 (UTC) - Oppose Distorted, overburnt. —kallerna™ 14:58, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
- Just a silly question, but how do you do a 210x180° indoor panorama without distorsion? Esby (talk) 19:31, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
- With DxO or Fisheye-Hemi I guess. But there are people to dislike distorded images, I personnally prefer distortion, more aesthetic. →Diti the penguin — 23:40, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
- Trying to put half of a sphere on a plane will always show up distorsion, rectilinear images just can't be achieved in such case. For those who don't understand what I am saying, take a world map (usually with a mercator projection), looks at the greenland and at the artic area, and ask yourself if there is no distorsion present, now takes another one, centered elsewhere, with another projection, you'll notice there will be always one or several area that appears as distorted. Esby (talk) 08:12, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
- So spherical distorsion should be replaced by cylindrical distorsion? Esby (talk) 12:47, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
- Trying to put half of a sphere on a plane will always show up distorsion, rectilinear images just can't be achieved in such case. For those who don't understand what I am saying, take a world map (usually with a mercator projection), looks at the greenland and at the artic area, and ask yourself if there is no distorsion present, now takes another one, centered elsewhere, with another projection, you'll notice there will be always one or several area that appears as distorted. Esby (talk) 08:12, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
- With DxO or Fisheye-Hemi I guess. But there are people to dislike distorded images, I personnally prefer distortion, more aesthetic. →Diti the penguin — 23:40, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
- Just a silly question, but how do you do a 210x180° indoor panorama without distorsion? Esby (talk) 19:31, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
- Support A lot of work I appreciate. --Curnen (talk) 13:21, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Maedin\talk 16:20, 14 July 2009 (UTC) Note: Voters may not have been aware of the new version. If it may change the outcome, please consider nominating again. Maedin\talk 16:20, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
