Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Rheinfall Panorama.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Rheinfall Panorama.jpg, featured
[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Sep 2010 at 16:31:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created - uploaded - nominated by Any1s (talk) 16:31, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Support -- Any1s (talk) 16:31, 5 September 2010 (UTC)- Support --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 16:37, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- Support --Peter Weis (talk) 16:45, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- Support --The High Fin Sperm Whale 17:09, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- Support Yann (talk) 17:48, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Comment, amazing image but imho a bit too dark. I tried to fix that (and some minor things) in File:Rheinfall Panorama changed.jpg and would recommend you to nominate also that version. Kind regards, —DerHexer (Talk) 17:57, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- The picture might seem too dark, because of the hight contrast caused by the sun at noon. However, lots of detail got lost in your version (compare the bright areas of the waterfalls). -- Any1s (talk) 18:18, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I'll try it a second time avoiding noise reduction. … Done. Ideas? Kind regards, —DerHexer (Talk) 19:28, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- Hi folks. I compared versions using PS and must admit that these changes are not quite reasonable. Changing the levels and therefore the general mood of the image does not seem to be necessary here. Note that dark areas affected by your edit tend to lack contrast. Using masks with levels/curves might be useful here. Readjusting the image's temperature from a coolish blue to a warm sunny tone is questionable if looking closer to the fauna (trees on right side for example). If considering a serious edit I recommend taking care of minor Chromatic aberrations, slightly increase sharpness and check the histogram for changes on levels/curves. Using masks/selections is critical. Regards. --Peter Weis (talk) 20:38, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- Well, yes, but I still find it too dark and too foggy. Small over- and underexposure is not critical, that's true. But I wouldn't oppose simply because of that. As I still like the motive but cannot ignore those things mentioned before I'm a bit undecided now what to do … Kind regards, —DerHexer (Talk) 21:56, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- Comment -- Definitely underexposed. Maybe a levels adjustment will do the job but we can already see some chromatic noise in the dark areas... A geometric correction is due, look at the 'verticals' of the building at left. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:01, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- Support--Avala (talk) 10:48, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Alt
[edit]
- Info Revised version: levels, saturation, corrected perspective, additional sharpening -- Any1s (talk) 10:22, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Support -- Any1s (talk) 10:22, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Support Changes pay out well, dude. --Peter Weis (talk) 11:16, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Support this version. --Petritap (talk) 13:20, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Support —DerHexer (Talk) 14:01, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Support --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 16:27, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Support Even better, hooray! --The High Fin Sperm Whale 17:49, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:07, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Support Yann (talk) 05:02, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
- Support Much better now. --Cayambe (talk) 14:43, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
- Support nice qualty. the buildings seem to be a bit distorted, but overall good for me. --mathias K 15:27, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
- Support I like it. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:08, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
- schwacher Support weil es grossartig wirkt, aber bei stimmungsvollerem Licht noch bessere Panoramen möglich wären. --Ikiwaner (talk) 11:54, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 18:47, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas
The chosen alternative is: File:Rheinfall_Panorama_revised.jpg
