Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:João Alfredo, Pernambuco, Brazil.jpg

File:João Alfredo, Pernambuco, Brazil.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Oct 2017 at 15:31:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:João Alfredo, Pernambuco, Brazil.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:João Alfredo, Pernambuco, Brazil.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
•  Info All by -- The Photographer 15:31, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
•  Support - Nice portrait in context. Just curious, though, why there are unsharp areas of the foreground on the left. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:41, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment Greenish tint. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:03, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

I think that the green colors is natural and real --The Photographer 00:09, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Just look at the clouds. Clouds are supposed to be close to light gray, but if you examine the RGB values the red channel is clearly much lower than the green and blue channels. I've put it in to Photoshop and it looks much better after a +25 magenta adjustment. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:53, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

•  Oppose Greenish.--Jebulon (talk) 09:32, 1 October 2017 (UTC)--Jebulon (talk) 22:55, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Greenish, but not too much for me. Daniel Case (talk) 17:46, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment To me it looks like the haze in the distance is playing some tricks with the color here. If you set the WB on one of the white flowers to the right of the man, nothing changes and there is this faint green tint. But if you set the WB on the small white building in the distance, there is a slight change for the better. Try it and see the result. --cart-Talk 14:17, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- Thennicke (talk) 09:19, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Alternative version

•  Info King of and Jebulon. This version haven`t any alteration and how you can see in raw file (image description), both version haven`t color alteration, only contrast and shadow recuperation. I need change this picture adding +25 magenta to show a irreal image?. --The Photographer 22:09, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

  "No color alteration" simply means blindly trusting the camera's auto WB to do the right thing, which isn't always the case. Here it clearly missed the mark. There is no such thing as a photo with zero post-processing; photos are always edited versions of reality, and even in-camera JPEGs are simply versions that were automatically edited by the camera. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:14, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

King of It is not a jpg generated by the camera, it's the raw file and you will find it on image description how I told above. --The Photographer 11:19, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm not saying it is. My point is that if even a JPEG with no further edits is a manipulated version of reality, then your photo which you edited from the RAW is also a manipulated version of reality. So you really shouldn't feel any qualms about making the WB more magenta if it feels right. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:26, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

•  Comment OK. You know. And I understand your point of view. I trust you, and strike my oppose vote. But I don’t support: I ‘’feel’’ it is too green.--Jebulon (talk) 22:55, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Mile (talk) 07:08, 10 October 2017 (UTC)