Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Garzweiler surface mine Bucket-wheel excavator 2019 1.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2020 at 19:58:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Machines
Info created & uploaded by Arne Müseler - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 19:58, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 19:58, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Comment I'm not sure how I feel about the photo, overall, but I'm definitely feeling like I want a wider crop on the right. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:44, 18 September 2020 (UTC)- Support Dramatic photo although there is a bit of barrel distortion. Cmao20 (talk) 01:25, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:28, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support --Fischer.H (talk) 08:07, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Weak oppose The subject is original and the composition good but the quality is clearly below FP level. It's too grainy (visiblem above all in the sky), lacks some sharpness and needs some perspective adjustments to get verticals vertical. I'd change my vote if the issues are successfully addressed Poco a poco (talk) 10:24, 19 September 2020 (UTC)- Comment Looks like a top-down view to me. Doesn't make sense to fix the verticals in that case (I got the same remark in this nomination). Looking at the machine at full size, it's really tack sharp. Shot with an Hasselblad at 100 ISO. Apart from a very very little noise in the sky, I really don't see why the quality would be "clearly below FP" -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:26, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- Indeed, the image quality looks fine to me. The grain is pretty minimal and not a big deal. And the excavator itself is really sharp. Cmao20 (talk) 17:28, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- I was confused by this comment, thought it looked rather crappy for a high-class medium format camera – until I realized that that "Hasselblad" is the 1″ sensor on-board camera of the Mavic 2 Pro. Now it makes sense. Actually looks pretty good for a drone shot. --El Grafo (talk) 15:13, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support I didn't like this shot the first several times I looked at its thumbnail. But on filling the screen with it, it does keep drawing the eye to the dozens of nested structures hidden within. And to my eye the detail on the main body of the machine is crispy even at 100%. The ancillary body to the right is softer but still offers enough detail to show off yet more structures within this beast of a machine. I like the parallel bands of colour, and the textures in the sandy layer. So I've changed my mind: this does feel like a striking image. --Bobulous (talk) 20:07, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support -- MartinD (talk) 07:53, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support--Llez (talk) 15:11, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support due to the detail visible, although I agree with Ikan's comment. Daniel Case (talk) 14:43, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
Weak support Tight crop at the right, but impressive excavator at full size. Agree with Daniel -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:34, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:03, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects#Machines
