Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:91 - Machu Picchu - Juin 2009.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:91 - Machu Picchu - Juin 2009.jpg, not featured
[edit]Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2009 at 01:34:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Info All by me -- S23678 (talk) 01:34, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
- Info HDR image of a small water canal going through Machu Picchu's ruins, taken with ND filter. I'm using this HDR nomination as testing grounds for recent Machu Picchu HDR images (heavy link, may freeze computers) I want to nominate as FPC. Given the general opposition (including mine) to HDR images that don't look natural, I tried limit the saturation and contrast. Hope you think I did a good job.
- Support -- S23678 (talk) 01:34, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
- Weak support Sharpness is borderline (roof), but at the image's high resolution that can be forgiven since downscaling sharpens the image. -- JovanCormac 09:43, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for noticing that no downsampling has been done to "increase quality". As mitigating factors for the (small!) quality defects, there's quite an important NR done, the DOF required is very large, the lens themselves are very large as well, AND I had to hurry-up to avoid pissing off more people by completly monopolizing the stairs ;) but that's not a REAL mitigating factor I think...! Downsampled versions are available here to compare with standard lower resolution FPC. --S23678 (talk) 13:41, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
- Support /Daniel78 (talk) 11:53, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose composition - not enough space --Leafnode✉ 22:20, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
- Your argument is valid (I can't convince you about liking the composition), but I'll just point the large FOV (14mm on APS-C) and the fact that moving back was impossible --S23678 (talk) 23:35, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
- I know that what I will say might sound like a profanity, but with a crop like this, at the first sight it looks to me like an ordinary pile of rubble. And I understand that there might be no space to move back. And while I'm very sorry, in my struggle for better FP level, which recently deteriorated, I can't vote "yes" :( --Leafnode✉ 14:04, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
- Support Jacopo Werther (talk) 13:56, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
- Support Very good for a HDR image. I'm glad you tried to make it look natural. -- Petritap (talk) 15:53, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose as Leafnode. Maybe it's not possible to take a FP of this object. --Berthold Werner (talk) 12:19, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose Surely not a "pile of ordinary rubbles", but the composition does not convince me.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:41, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
- Support Almost perceptible! romazur (talk) 18:55, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose Composition. --Karel (talk) 20:21, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
- Comment I don't know much about HDR, but it seems to me that the shadows are just as dark as the original. The main difference to my eyes is a yellow cast on the stones, and a more blue sky. Is this the intent of the HDR work? --99of9 (talk) 21:25, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
- HDR is a very wide field, just as a photoshopped image isn't just an optimized image of a girl in a magazine. I used HDR here to get more color saturation, more local contrast and more details. Having put the shadows less dark would have created an image too far from reality, and while it can be pleasing artistically, it would not have stood a chance in FPC. Verify for yourself and check the difference in details in dark areas. As for the yellow tint, while playing with the levels in photoshop, I got this pleasing golden color and I decided to keep it, since the Incas are associated with gold. --S23678 (talk) 23:19, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikiwaner (talk) 20:09, 9 November 2009 (UTC)