Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Püsik-seljarohi Muraste looduskaitsealal.jpg

File:Püsik-seljarohi Muraste looduskaitsealal.jpg, withdrawn

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2016 at 03:40:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Püsik-seljarohi Muraste looduskaitsealal.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Püsik-seljarohi Muraste looduskaitsealal.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
•  Info created by Raimond Raadik - uploaded and nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 03:40, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
•  Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 03:40, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
•  Support Not sure about some of the trees in the background looking normally processed but oh ... that ... green. I feel like falling slowly forward into this one. Daniel Case (talk) 05:32, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
•  Support Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:07, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
•  Comment - Same comment as above: I would gladly vote to feature, but a description in an internationally-understood language is essential. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:54, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
  •  Comment I strongly disagree with the statement above. What is meant by "internationally-understood" language ? English is recommended, but not a mandatory, as Commons in a multilingual project.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jebulon (talk • contribs)
    • Internationally-understood in this case means understood outside Estonia (and, arguably, Finland), and it is strange for you to assume English is the only such language. Other possibilities include but are not limited to Spanish, French, German, and I would also concede Arabic, Mandarin, Swahili - but not a language spoken by only a few million people and not (like Dutch) related to any language spoken by a large number. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:04, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
•  Done Kruusamägi (talk) 12:54, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

 Support - Thank you. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:06, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

•  Support --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 13:36, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose The composition feels weird to me, sorry. Strong distortion. — Julian H.^✈ 15:13, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

It might just be the topography ... not all forest floors are flat as a pancake. Daniel Case (talk) 17:07, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

The floor doesn't bother me, just the curvature of the trees on the right and left edges. — Julian H.^✈ 18:08, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

I try to understand the exif here (50mm and f/1.4 but good dof and almost fisheye-lens perspective distortion)--ArildV (talk) 18:59, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I find this very strange, too. This distortion looks more like it was taken with a fisheye lens. Either the EXIF is wrong or something happened in the postprocessing. --Code (talk) 20:30, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

•  Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 18:46, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose with JulianH.--Jebulon (talk) 20:06, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
•  Neutral For me it looks like a barrel distortion, but I don´t understand it with a 50mm lens. --Hubertl 23:38, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per Julian. INeverCry 00:51, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose It is normal to have distorted vertical if you tilt the camera too much to the ground, even with a 50mm lens. The main issue is for me the little lacks of quality at the edges (sky a bit burned, blurred areas, strong CAs), all visible even at preview with my eyes. Though there is some visual interest, this not FP IMO. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 11:49, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose basically per Julian: I'm still not sure what it is, but something is pretty weird about this. Also the ratio of foreground (green forest floor) vs. mid-ground (forest floor with trees) vs. background (trees only) somehow looks unbalanced to me. --El Grafo (talk) 13:42, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
•  I withdraw my nomination Kruusamägi (talk) 19:52, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Laitche (talk) 13:06, 9 January 2016 (UTC)