Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bahnhof-Mooskamp Werkshalle-innen.jpg

File:Bahnhof-Mooskamp Werkshalle-innen.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 May 2019 at 16:45:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Bahnhof-Mooskamp Werkshalle-innen.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bahnhof-Mooskamp Werkshalle-innen.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Germany
•  Info created by DerMische - uploaded by DerMische - nominated by DerMische -- DerMische (talk) 16:45, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- DerMische (talk) 16:45, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Info 360-view: panoviewer DerMische (talk) 16:51, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support--Peulle (talk) 17:41, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose I don't really understand the choice of viewpoing. Nor sure the subject has high enough wow. Being inside a tram might be worth the 360 (though challenging). Or being inside a great museum hall with lots of vehicles of land and air all around. But sandwiched between two trams is not a great position. -- Colin (talk) 18:03, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:14, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose I like the way this is treated like looking up and down the aisle in a church, a popular viewpoint in these panoramas and you can really get a good look at all the details of the trams. What I don't think is good is the way the highlights are treated in the photo. All lamps and big highlights have dull gray centers, it doesn't look good. --Cart (talk) 20:50, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose Underexposition (white color look more like grey) and chromatic aberrations --Wilfredor (talk) 23:16, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per above--BoothSift 00:32, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Info Thanks for all your feedback! You are right! I have load up a new version with correctet highlights and reduced chromatic aberrations. DerMische (talk) 08:48, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Colin and Cart. Daniel Case (talk) 14:27, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- Piotr Bart (talk) 14:50, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support Great work. -- -donald- (talk) 09:36, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Comment - Still not IMO an FP after the edit, but DerMische, you should ping everyone who voted, so that they have a better chance of seeing the new version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:08, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Info @Wilfredor @Cart @Booth @Daniel Case I have upload a newer version with correctet highlights and reduced chromatic aberrations. Maybe you wanna take a secound look.. Thanks and greetings! DerMische (talk) 13:38, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

• Looks better, but when I look at it in the panoviewer, there is a frame missing. Is that just my bad computer? --Cart (talk) 13:46, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

•  Info @Cart No problem here with the panoviewer.DerMische (talk) 18:03, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

•  Support I checked it on another computer and it was ok. Must be a bug on the older computer. Mive to support now. --Cart (talk) 18:06, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

•  Oppose per Colin. -- Karelj (talk) 21:12, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 03:46, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--BoothSift 22:57, 1 May 2019 (UTC)