Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Spøttrup Castle Eastern Facade 2015-07-12.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Apr 2016 at 19:46:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications
Info Created, uploaded and nominated by Slaunger -- Slaunger (talk) 19:46, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Info This is a picture of the eastern wing of Spøttrup Castle in Denmark. One of the few remaining medieval castles in Denmark (or one of the few, which have been restored faithfully to medieval times). It is the back side of the castle, showing it is a true water castle with a moat and a large embankment. Take a moment to study and enjoy all the details in the brick work, which is telling of the story of this castle, which has been turbulent. The shafts are connected to early toilets inside the castle leading the waste directly into the moat. This wing was originally built 1525-1530. At that time, the facade contained large arched windows. The remains are clearly seen in the wall. The castle was severely damaged in its north wing by a tidal wave in 1534, and the windows were thereafter replaced by narrow sighting slits. At this time tension was rising in Denmark, and a civil war (the Count's Feud) roared in 1534-36. During this period the castle was under attack by Skipper Clement and was damaged. Over the years the castle had many owners caring only little about the history of the castle and making many restructurings. In the beginning of the 20th centry it looked like this. But after a fire in 1937, the state acquired the castle and decided to restore the moat, embankment, and original red brick surface to bring it back to the form it had when originally constructed. Finally, in 1941, the castle was opened to the public as a museum. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:46, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Comment I also have images of comparable quality as seen from the south-east and southern wing. I have been a bit in doubt about which one to nominate, but ended up with the east wing (after asking a friend in private) as I find the brick work contains the most interesting details there. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:53, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Support -- Slaunger (talk) 19:46, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Support Description on FPC is too long --The Photographer (talk) 20:02, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
- @The Photographer: : I am sorry. I have had a long break from Commons, and I had just soo many words piled up and waiting to come out
. I promise; it will not happen again (until the next long break)! -- Slaunger (talk) 20:19, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
- A too long sorry
--The Photographer (talk) 20:26, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
- A too long sorry
- @The Photographer: : I am sorry. I have had a long break from Commons, and I had just soo many words piled up and waiting to come out
Support Old and cold. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:43, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Support Nice --LivioAndronico (talk) 21:54, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Question - Most of this is a great photo, but what accounts for the distracting motion (?) blur of the trees on the right side? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:24, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Ikan Kekek: : Thanks for your observation. It is due to four things.
- The top vegetation to the right looked particularly ugly because I had a bad out of focus frame in the stitch, and a seam separating such that the top vegetation originated from that bad frame. I have good overlap between frames, such that I could mask it out in the stitch. The bad frame is now in a new upload only used to fill in some backgroud sky and clouds to the upper right and is not noticeable. So look again!
- The stitch covers about 100 ° using an equilateral projection. This gives rise to a considerable geometric distortion of the vegetation at the edges.
- It is a windy location and with a shutter speed of 1/250 s, there is some motion blur of the most protruding vegeation.
- As focus is on the facade, the background vegeation is naturally a bit out of focus.
- The top vegetation to the right looked particularly ugly because I had a bad out of focus frame in the stitch, and a seam separating such that the top vegetation originated from that bad frame. I have good overlap between frames, such that I could mask it out in the stitch. The bad frame is now in a new upload only used to fill in some backgroud sky and clouds to the upper right and is not noticeable. So look again!
- -- Slaunger (talk) 14:15, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Support - Thank you for the explanation and the improvement. I'm satisfied that the current version is a FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:38, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Ikan Kekek: : Thanks for your observation. It is due to four things.
Support I have a weak spot for castles. -- Ram-Man 03:08, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Support − Meiræ 07:21, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Neutral in fact, the other image - we were talking about - wow´s me more... But it´s a pretty good work, except the blurring on the right upper side (wich is repairable with PS because its a HDR, but therefor you have to start again from the very beginning of the postprocessing). --Hubertl 10:51, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Hubertl: Thanks for your very fair review! Unlike the southern facade, this is actually a single exposure panorama. I have frames from three exposures and have tried to make it HDR as well, but I have had too many problems with moving vegetation and parallax errors for give a useful result (handheld, no tripod). I think the light is better on the alternative, which also has a cleaner composition, but this ones gives a better impression of the construction, and the many restructurings making it more valuable IMO. Regarding the blurry vegetation to the right: Have a look again. I have uploaded a restitch, where it is masked out. -- Slaunger (talk) 14:22, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:18, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Support --Zcebeci (talk) 19:02, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Support --Pugilist (talk) 21:23, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Support INeverCry 02:08, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:09, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Support — Rftblr (talk) 07:50, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Moderate support Doesn't seem like it would be so interesting. But it is. I wish there had been less distortion at the sides, but that's the price of perspective correction I guess. Daniel Case (talk) 01:42, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 05:09, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications