Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Koblenz - Panorama von Festung Ehrenbreitstein.jpg

File:Koblenz - Panorama von Festung Ehrenbreitstein.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Jun 2015 at 21:03:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Koblenz - Panorama von Festung Ehrenbreitstein.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Koblenz - Panorama von Festung Ehrenbreitstein.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Panoramas#Germany
•  Info all by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 21:03, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 21:03, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Pleasant composition with no serious issues, but I think too much sharpening was applied. Dllu (talk) 21:31, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

I just made a downscale, no further sharpening in this image. --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:34, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

•  Super strong support Wow! Great panorama! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:14, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Very interesting and very impressive job. Very homogeneous, and I did not find any stitching issue. Excellent and useful document, with a good resolution. Maybe a bit "blue"? I'm not sure about the color balance, but I remain convinced it is a FP.--Jebulon (talk) 22:21, 10 June 2015 (UTC)|}}
• temp.  Oppose +  Request the blue color canal is wrong (for me)! In the top center are some editing rests/artefacts visible. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:25, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose Nice photo and view, but wrong colour balance, the photo has been taken to late, the sun is in the back in the early morning only. --Schaengel (talk) 07:55, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

I reconsidered and changed my opinion to contra because of the wrong light and bad colour balance. --Schaengel (talk) 16:49, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

No surprise because of your personal motivated behaviour, also here visible. --Wladyslaw (talk) 16:51, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

I'll look at the colour balance, but it't not wrong in general. IMO here is at most a moderate correction necessary. The small black line I'll correct soon, not a big deal. Schaengel: for sure a morning mood image is very often nice. But we have not bad light conditions here. Everythink is visible well and there are not disturbing shadows. The light is very strong so that the scenery is very distincted. So in my opinion it's not to late. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:14, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

•  Info Alchemist-hp: all fixed now IMO. Colour balance should be now perfect. For reference of the colours you may compare the colours of the state flags which are placed on the "Deutsches Eck". They are all well-defined. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:36, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

  As an alternative? "Color balance extreme", but the way is important ... --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:59, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Alt???

• Sorry, but not. Your version looks for me oversaturated. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:52, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

• Yes, ok. I wrote: "extreme color balance", but your image looks still too unnatural blue-greyish for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 08:59, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
• @Wladyslaw: Hast Du evtl. einen Polfilter genutzt? --Alchemist-hp (talk) 09:01, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
• No, I didn't have used a polarizer or other optical filters. I'll look after the blue-greyish again, but in my eyes the actual version hasn't really a problem with this. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:05, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

•  Comment Far much better, IMO.--Jebulon (talk) 10:50, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:54, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Comment a bit overprocessed? a little bit posterized on the sky. --Laitche (talk) 18:48, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm not a friend of de-noising an image where it isn't necessary. Did you really think the sky is disturbing? --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:09, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Hmm, not so disturbing but if you can fix it, that would be better :) --Laitche (talk) 19:28, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

•  Comment I am not convinced with this pano. Two aspects are distracting: there are strange artefacts on the sky, often appearing if you do relatively extreme highlight / shadow correction or if you do manual corrections (e.g. saturation) on one color channel (e.g. blue). But imho this artefacts can be easily fixed with a local denoising / unsharpening. I am also no big fan of excessive global NR, but local corrections on the sky are mandatory here. Second point: the light is far from being optimal. Most facades of the buildings are in unfortunate shadow whereas very bright sunlight comes from the side and touches the roofs and leads to near overexposed areas on it. --Tuxyso (talk) 13:29, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose Posterized sky, oversharpened in the center. Nice subject, even better with slightly more space towards the bottom. — Julian H.^✈ 21:01, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose Posterized sky, even visible with a downsampling of 50% -- Christian Ferrer 15:29, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose Nice composition but per others (including Tuxyso). --Laitche (talk) 17:12, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 10:49, 20 June 2015 (UTC)