Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:View over Reinevågen towards north, Moskenes, Nordland, Norway, 2017 April.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Feb 2022 at 22:00:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Norway
Info Another amazing Norwegian landscape by Ximonic, I really like the colours and the overall stormy atmosphere. created by Ximonic - uploaded by Ximonic - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 22:00, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 22:00, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
Question Beautiful view with dramatic sky. But why is it barely 7 Mpix from a 18Mpix camera? --C messier (talk) 22:08, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
- Because to combat noise, which the older camera always produced quite a lot in these conditions, and people seemed not to like noise at all. I just always wanted to drive the attention to the scene rather than the pixels, even in full size, and that's my personal preference.--Ximonic (talk) 14:45, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
- Isn't that a violation of the rule not to downsample a photo so that it looks sharper (OK, less noisy)? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:54, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
- For me personally, it doesn't matter. But if it's a strict rule, maybe then it cannot be FP, and I would be OK with it. It wouldn't change my opinion on how I like to process my own pictures though. Especially those, which were taken by an inferior camera, I had to approach very differently and do sacrifices. I only want to feel comfortable with them. I would like to mention though, in those rather retro times, this was normal in the photo community of Commons. For example, I was a huge fan of the work by Luca Galuzzi at the time when I got the drive to photograph for Wikipedia, and up until very recent days I've been using that same old gear as back then. I couldn't magically raise my standards with yesterdays equipment though so that's where I come from. Concider, that I have basically been stuck in the year 2009 until 2021. --Ximonic (talk) 17:00, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
- Ikan Kekek, as far as I know there is no official rule that you can't downsample a photo. It's just this page tends to dislike it on principle. Of course you are free to oppose on that basis. Personally I think the picture we do have is still worthy of FP. Cmao20 (talk) 19:19, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
- I guess you didn't check Commons:Image guidelines. In the "Quality and featured photographic images" section, the second guideline is: "Images should not be downsampled (sized down) in order to appear of better quality." Later in the paragraph, FPs are referenced specifically: "for Featured Pictures, the original non-downsampled version is preferred" (this refers to exceptions in which downsampling is otherwise acceptable, but those are "images of living persons" and not landscapes, in any case). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:48, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
- I have seen that page before, it is useful but also they are only 'guidelines' and I see photos that don't fit them perfectly pass FPC quite a lot. Cmao20 (talk) 13:24, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
Comment Looks very flat. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:57, 8 February 2022 (UTC)- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 11:41, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Light is a bit flat, but the bizarre shapes of the mountains and the exciting colour contrast – cold colours in water and on the mountains, warm earthy shades in the flatland, vivid red on the houses – more than make up for it. --Aristeas (talk) 14:59, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:32, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:49, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:20, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 21:53, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
Oppose I like the atmosphere and the view, but irrespective of the discussion about downsampling, the composition doesn't fully work for me. But I do think it should be sharper, especially as a downsampled photo of this size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:24, 9 February 2022 (UTC)- Support Per Aristeas, manages to be beautiful in its dreariness. Daniel Case (talk) 04:42, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:10, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Ikan Kekek. --Tagooty (talk) 06:35, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 22:42, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support quite a colourful one. --SHB2000 (talk) 06:55, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:33, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 19:12, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 05:38, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:47, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 06:13, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Settlements#Norway
