Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Water Palace, Jaipur.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

File:Water Palace, Jaipur.jpg

[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2020 at 07:28:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jal Mahal, Jaipur
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#India
  •  Info created by Dey.sandip - uploaded by Dey.sandip - nominated by Dey.sandip -- Dey.sandip (talk) 07:28, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Dey.sandip (talk) 07:28, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose on technical grounds. How this made it through QIC I have no idea, but there's no way this is an FP with this extreme perspective warp. Both sides are leaning in heavily.--Peulle (talk) 12:41, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • I usually don't comment on my nomination, but felt I needed to state what I think. Heard this familiar boring argument about perspective many times now in FPC. Is it a rule that images need to have a certain kind of perspective to be acceptable here? In fact, this is the natural perspective that a wide angle lens like the one used will produce. Correcting that is rather an anamoly if you care to think differently. At the end of the day, this is a picture as seen and captured by camera and not your eyes. Hence the argument about perspective is very debatable. It seems that this FPC has long become a rule driven (and these are perceived too by some) place where anything much deviating is always opposed. What you do this way is you not only kill the nomination (now, a bunch of others will follow suite and just say "per blah blah" and get done) but also the spirit. Partly, the reason I had stopped nominating images here. -- Dey.sandip (talk) 14:06, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • That statement itself is debatable and subject to personal interpretations, how do you define what is an acceptable purpose of perspective distortion ? In my case, I think the distortion here adds a certain visual style to the photograph and certainly it looks nice to many (people here or outside commons). What makes that a purpose not acceptable ? Should that be sufficient ground for rejection? I don't think it's a very strong reason to put an oppose, unless common wisdom conditioned reviewers here to think in that certain way. It does not matter whether this image becomes an FP or not, in the broader setting that's even negligible, but we should encourage different interpretations and perspectives for better inclusivity of all images. --Dey.sandip (talk) 06:32, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • When judging these images, each user is free to make their own subjective evaluations. So yes, it is sufficient grounds for an oppose. If a lot of people have a different view to that single user's opinion, an image can still be promoted, but that still does not take away that reviewer's prerogative of voting the way they see fit.--Peulle (talk) 10:52, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Nice atmosphere, but per Peulle. --Cayambe (talk) 13:37, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Perspective distortion is OK for me if it's for a specific purpose - in the past I have supported obviously distorted pictures of, say, a building looking upwards. The trouble here is that there is no particular reason why wide-angle lens distortion adds anything to the photograph. Cmao20 (talk) 16:17, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose per others. --Fischer.H (talk) 17:27, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • FYI this may be fixable in Photoshop/Gimp if you're interested (it sounds like you would prefer not to, though). Especially true if the original crop has a little extra room on the left/right. — Rhododendrites talk |  03:42, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thank you for your suggestion, yes, I am aware of the same. However, at present I don't have such perspective correction softwares with me; you are welcome to try these tools and create a derivative, if you are interested. -- Dey.sandip (talk) 06:21, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose These sloping verticals are not a feature of the wide-angle-lens, but arise because the camera is tilted up (towards the sun/birds) rather than kept level. And, yes, the eye sees distorted verticals if we look up too (though you have to fight your brain to notice them). But the big difference is that when the eye looks back down, as you would if looking directly at the three buildings here, the distortion goes away. But a photo's perspective doesn't shift as you change your viewpoint. So if we want this to look natural, we are stuck looking at the sun and the birds and only seeing the buildings out of the corner of our eyes. Which might be a perfectly valid artistic intention. But I think you could have taken this photo with the camera level and the atmosphere would have been the same, and without the disturbing distortion. So, I think that's why folks are unconvinced. While the birds are nice in silhouette, the buildings are a bit small/dark in the frame and not detailed, with the backlighting not helping here. -- Colin (talk) 07:52, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination -- Dey.sandip (talk) 14:29, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Water_Palace,_Jaipur.jpg&oldid=475503221"