Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ālī Qāpū in golden time.jpg

File:Ālī Qāpū in golden time.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2019 at 15:34:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Ālī Qāpū in golden time.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ālī Qāpū in golden time.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Iran
•  Info created by Amirpashaei - uploaded by Amirpashaei - nominated by Amirpashaei -- Amirpashaei (talk) 15:34, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- Amirpashaei (talk) 15:34, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:12, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --GRDN711 (talk) 02:35, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:32, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Isiwal (talk) 10:12, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
•  Question Amirpashaei, can you comment a bit more about the processing of this work? 25 frames is a lot of frames. Have you used all of them for the whole frame or only portions of it (sky)? what is the time window between the first and last frame? Poco² 10:26, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
  •  Info @Poco a poco: picture merged from 25 pictures. but 5 frames. each frame contain 5 pictures from dark to light for HDR. 5 frames located in the center, top left, top right. bottom left and bottom right. because of using tilt shift lens, there is no perspective problem and you don't need to perspective correction in photoshop. It takes 1-2 minutes to take the first and last photos. The center frame could be missed but I captured it because more sharpness. After 15 minutes I captured ali qapu in blue time. same method. No change in position and camera and lens . https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%C4%80l%C4%AB_Q%C4%81p%C5%AB_in_blue_time.jpg for monument of this picture (golden time) I used from second picture (blue time) . because monument in low light had more glory. But the sky light of each photo is its own--Amirpashaei (talk) 11:19, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
    •  Support --Poco² 21:01, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose Both photos (golden and blue) are very nice to look at as a whole. In detail the quality suffers towards the edge of the frame, which is quite blurred with strong purple CA. There are also some HDR artefacts where bright areas with perhaps a little movement have created an unreal effect. You might be able to rescue those by using a single middle-exposure frame, or by trying to align the exposures better. I don't know what software you use, but in PtGui it can be best to let it align all the frames rather than picking the option where it thinks multiple exposures are already aligned by using a tripod -- with HDR highlights with fine detail, the slightest movement can wreck the tonemapping algorithm. Compared to the blue photo, I see you have Photoshopped out some metalwork on the roofs and the fountain pipe in the middle of the pond. I think those are permanent features you should retain: we are not just trying to create a lovely picture but also to faithfully capture what it looked like. Our best HDR FPs have handled the light better than this, particularly on the left side which appears quite blown. Is the vignetting natural due to the lens or did you add some in processing? I think perhaps if better processed this might pass at FP due to the lovely light, but at the moment there are too many flaws. -- Colin (talk) 16:05, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
  • @Colin: thanks for your good criticism and suggestions. I will edit tomorrow and will fix the problems. --Amirpashaei (talk) 18:32, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Colin --Uoaei1 (talk) 16:26, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support This version is much better --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:37, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per Colin as well --Boothsift Is Here 06:35, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

•  Support now--Boothsift Is Here 02:46, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

•  Oppose regretfully per Colin, for now at least. I also think it would be better with a tighter crop so there was a bit less featureless space. Cmao20 (talk) 13:37, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

•  Weak support I still think it would be better with a tighter crop, but it's good enough for FP now. Cmao20 (talk) 20:53, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

• @Colin: , I improved the picture as you told. I would be happy to report if there is another problem. Thanks for your nice suggestions colin. --Amirpashaei (talk) 18:01, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support now. That's a good improvement on the blown areas and HDR issues. Wrt the crop that Cmao20 suggests, it is difficult to crop out the lovely sky with its variation in tone. I think I am fine featuring this crop as people can always made a 3:2 or 16:9 crop from it and upload to a different filename if they want. -- Colin (talk) 18:36, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
•  weak weak support Some strange artifacts at the bottom, a blurred area on the left, and stranges edges (scafolding notably). But otherwise a beautiful composition, and nice colours. - Benh (talk) 10:30, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
  • @Benh: thanks benh. bottom of picture is pond floor and there is some Scratch even in raw files. --Amirpashaei (talk) 10:39, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Gnosis (talk) 05:11, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

@Uoaei1: , @Boothsift: , @Cmao20: I improved the picture as colin told. I would be happy to report if there is another problem. Thanks--Amirpashaei (talk) 14:31, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

• @Benh: you're right benh. in the pond floor I found some noise because HDR processing and I removed them. thanks. --Amirpashaei (talk) 19:09, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 23:57, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Iran