Request Excellent image, but it should be geocoded. That should be relatively easy, but perhaps benh should do it for optimal precision? --Slaunger (talk) 15:04, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'd like to add, in case some don't know, that this is an exact NW heading, as the feets of the tower exactly match the cardinal direction. Benh (talk) 12:35, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I, for sure did not know, it just appeared to me that it was approximately NW, but nice to know it is also the exact heading. Thank you for enlightening me. --Slaunger (talk) 13:00, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree a bit with Albertus teolog, and I guess he refers to File:Paryż wieża 4 mod.jpg which is taken from a farther point. My picture doesn't "change" the proportions. Proportions are of course differents depending on where you look at any object from. It's up to reviewers to decide if the point of view is annoying or not (please oppose if you believe this isn't good, I would). If needed, it's very easy for me to perspective correct (this is actually what I did first, but I didn't like the result). Benh (talk) 12:35, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I certainly would like to see how you can "correct" the perspective of your image, but the quality is so much better than the current VI that it is anyway a better illustration of the scope. Yann (talk) 14:41, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Softwares, such as Hugin, let you easy fix perspective. I'll let you know when I do that ! (but it took me 6 months to answer alvesgapar's request to take that photo so... I hope you're not in a hurry ;) ) Benh (talk) 21:03, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I not opposed to your photos, since I am the author of the alternative images. It was not by to elegant :-) I expressed my reservations only. Albertus teolog (talk) 06:38, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't think perspective correction would be a good idea. I think the perspective should fit the point of view of the picture. If the perspective was corrected, then it would give a false impression on the tower's proportions. --Eusebius (talk) 21:43, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I agree that taking the shot farther away, like in the other image, would result in a better photo. Also agree with Eusebius that an atificial perspective corretion is not a good solution as it would cause a different type of distortion. Until Benh repeats the shot from a better position I guess we will have to live with this one, whose quality is excellent -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:59, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
