Support as nominator –
Charles (
talk) 16:08, 24 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Question - What's the pinkish red object behind the bird? (Also, bird strikes me as slightly oversharpened). —
Chris Woodrich (
talk) 00:58, 25 October 2017 (UTC)reply
I sharpen Photoshop CS6 Unsharp Mask radius 1 pixel 50% threshold 0. Object is light shining on some organic object - probably a tree root - I can't remember. I could of course clone it all out!
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 11:17, 25 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Perhaps a bit less sharpness on the face. It's quite jarring. Neutral on the orange object. —
Chris Woodrich (
talk) 00:10, 26 October 2017 (UTC)reply
I had a play and prefer it as is!
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 13:58, 26 October 2017 (UTC)reply
Comment See my edit on the discussion page on the FP project.
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 09:39, 1 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose. I'm rather bothered by the slight asymmetry, though my understanding is that access to the point directly under the dome's centre is restricted, so it's probably not possible to take a perfect photo under normal circumstances. --
Paul_012 (
talk) 14:42, 7 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Comment: I changed the section header to be more specific. Hope it doesn't break anything. --
Paul_012 (
talk) 14:42, 7 November 2017 (UTC)reply
No
Paul_012 the dome is famous because it is not symmetrical ..... and is perfectly centered. Thanks--LivioAndronico(
talk) 14:47, 7 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Comment I think the other picture of the dome in the article is more useful.
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 22:59, 7 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Support, nice shot, great EV for not symmetrical dome.
Renata (
talk) 01:27, 9 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Support very good and sharp. First i thought sun is so strong, now i saw there are lights. Also i like colors here, natural. --
PetarM (
talk) 12:39, 11 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Support high-quality, good EV.
TSP (
talk) 11:31, 14 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Promoted File:Cathedral (Siena) - Dome interior.jpg --
ArmbrustTheHomunculus 21:35, 15 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. Not a very aesthetically pleasing painting, but it serves the purpose with high EV.
Mattximus (
talk) 03:19, 13 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Support - excellent quality for a painting of this age
TSP (
talk) 11:32, 14 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Weak support – Good detail & composition, although I wonder about color saturation, and I would make
Katse Dam the primary target article.
Sca (
talk) 15:31, 15 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Weak support - I agree with Sca about the colour saturation. The sky seems a bit wonky in places. —
Chris Woodrich (
talk) 05:16, 16 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Conditional support provided the saturation is dropped a notch or three... --
Janke |
Talk 13:51, 16 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose – weak because of EV, good composition but technically awful. The sky has lots of stitching errors (most obvious in upper-right side), also sky's shades of blue look fake.
Bammesk (
talk) 05:00, 17 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Оppose Sky on right side is off. --
PetarM (
talk) 13:30, 17 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Оppose - Incorrect stitching on top right.
Mattximus (
talk) 20:17, 18 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Support - Liked the composition. A good thematic contrast of manmade vs natural. Roads add to the effect. As for image quality, I leave it to the experts.
Nattu (
talk) 21:12, 23 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Nov 2017 at 05:29:06 (UTC)
Reason
Archetypical image of the Chinatown at night (or at least the one in Bangkok), with its busy main street lined with untidy façades bearing bright lightbox signs shouting Chinese characters. Quality is at the top end of what can be expected from a hand-held night shot. Though the people in the foreground admittedly obscure the vanishing point, I think they also help provide context.
Oppose - Background is distracting; blown highlights on several strands. —
Chris Woodrich (
talk) 03:54, 27 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Oppose Great EV, but not FP quality, especially with the background. --
Paul_012 (
talk) 08:02, 27 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Oppose Unnatural background - one would assume the seeds mature on the plant, not on faux leather... --
Janke |
Talk 08:57, 27 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Withdrawn First attempt at FP. Yes, out of focus as away from center. Background was chosen to provide contrast to seed cluster details. On plant, overlapping layers of seed clusters make it near-impossible to photograph just one. See image at
Clematis terniflora for example.
David notMD (
talk) 15:59, 27 November 2017 (UTC)reply
Comment David, don't be discouraged, please keep submitting candidates! Contributions are always welcome, but the criteria at FPC are pretty tough - look at actual FPs to get an idea of what is expected! Regards, --
Janke |
Talk 13:19, 28 November 2017 (UTC)reply