Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Iglesia de los remedios 1.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Iglesia de los remedios 1.jpg, not featured
[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Apr 2010 at 14:22:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 14:22, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
Support -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 14:22, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
Neutral I really like this picture, but it is rather noisy at full res. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 15:51, 13 April 2010 (UTC)- Neutral per THFSW above. --MAURILBERT (discuter) 17:23, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
- Υπέρ --патриот8790 (talk) 18:26, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - Very poor image quality -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:32, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
Question And how did you arrive at such precise judgement? I sure would like to find an instrument of such accuracy. Unless, of course that is your opinion, in which case one just must consider the source. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 05:50, 14 April 2010 (UTC)- Oppose, with regrets. Gorgeous photo, but much too noisy at full res. Steven Walling 00:13, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
- Question and where it it written that noise is a bad thing? --Tomascastelazo (talk) 05:46, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment Here - It's written quite clearly. --Laveol (talk) 07:40, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
- Comment Laveol, sorry, that is hardly an authoritative source... written by who knows who... and remember that the emperor has no clothes on... --Tomascastelazo (talk) 12:55, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
- Comment - I suggest Tomascastelazo to stop the improper behaviour right now. You are most welcome back as long as your behaviour remains civil, your contributions are constructive, and you accept the opinions of others and the agreed rules. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 13:23, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
- Comment I suggest Alvesgaspar listen to his own advice right now too. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 13:37, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
- Let's stick to comments on content, not contributors. To address Tomascastelazo's concern: at lower res the photo is just fine, but if an image is noisy at full resolution (like this one is) most FPC participants decline to support. You're welcome to disagree about the importance of noise in quality photography, but around Commons it's far from unusual to oppose based on noise. Steven Walling 19:30, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose High noise is a bad thing to me. --99of9 (talk) 07:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose It's a nice picture, but is indeed noisy when viewed at full resolution. Also, the nominator should try to take the comments a little less personally. Jafeluv (talk) 12:37, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose Noisy, too dark. —kallerna™ 18:45, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
- Comment This is really nonsense... noise or grain is a very relative issue. I just had this image printed on 30x20 inches at 158 dpi and there is no noise visible at that magnification printed, it looks nothing like what I see on screen. A print that size is in itself extraordinary, very few photographs find their way into that size most of the time... Now, screen resolution is only about 72 dpi, so when you look at a picture at max resolution, you are not really getting the entire story, it is limited by the monitor´s ability to reproduce the image, which is an incomplete representation. Now, as for noise. Noise is the digital version of grain. Any picture can be labeled noisy anyway, it all depends on the degree of magnification. I don´t mind criticism at all really, it is part of life, what I don´t agree with are when unfounded opinions are camouflaged as knowledgable informed observations. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 21:38, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Support A little grain (noise) is natural. --Lawboy25 (talk) 22:09, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 5 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 15:16, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
