Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ravenel Bridge at night from Mt Pleasant.jpg

File:Ravenel Bridge at night from Mt Pleasant.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Mar 2017 at 22:43:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Ravenel Bridge at night from Mt Pleasant.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ravenel Bridge at night from Mt Pleasant.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges
•  Info all by Juliancolton –Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:43, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
•  Support A couple people at QIC seemed to think this would stance a chance here at FPC, so I'm giving it a shot. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 22:43, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose I don't like the crop at right with the cut-off support. lNeverCry 23:28, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Wow! It's like some futuristic fantasy painting. (And if need be that last support column to the right can be cropped off.) --cart-Talk 23:55, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
  • @W.carter: I'd actually like to see more space at right with two full columns. It might gel a bit more with the two main supports. But it looks like I'll just be slowing down FPCBot a bit with my lone oppose... lNeverCry 07:19, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
    • As you see, I'm not opposing, but I found your rationale perfectly reasonable, and I even agree with you that it would be better if the rest of the support were included. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:43, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
      • I don't have a strong position about this, I'm happy with the pic either way. But if you were to twist my arm, I could say that working with what we have and cropping the last half support would move the composition almost into the style of moribana ikebana. The pylons on the bridge acting like "flowers" and it would actually balance the floating thing acting like "stone" in the water in such a compo. Note: This is just me flipping out into artsy talk again. --cart-Talk 12:28, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

• I like the art talk, but I think the removing the rest of the support would be a problem because then the section with the diagonal girders going up to the tower would be cropped very close. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:39, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

• Also true, let's just leave the pic as it is and enjoy it. :) --cart-Talk 13:02, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

I tried the suggested crop here but ended up reverting it since I agree with Ikan in that the suspension cables were too close to the edge of the frame. Frankly, if I were to shoot it again, I'd probably frame it a bit differently. My "excuse" here is that the mosquitoes were absolutely appalling down by the water, so I was rather hasty with my composition and made a mad dash back to the car after a couple exposures. That said, this is one of the only spots where you can get such a view of the bridge, and it's on private property, so I probably won't be reshooting for quite a while... –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:30, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

• Now that I actually see the alternative, I find it more restful. It could be offered as an alt, I suppose. However, I don't care greatly. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:59, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

A very good "excuse", we like you to survive. ;) --cart-Talk 19:25, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

•  Support - The thing to the left that's floating in the water is a bit of a distraction, but I love the soft light cart refers to. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:01, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Per Ikan. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:44, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
•  Support – Lucas^T 10:40, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
•  Support impressive --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:10, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
•  Support per cart. Daniel Case (talk) 01:07, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Composition is fine for me.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:45, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:08, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Code (talk) 06:26, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Pleasant light and composition, and very decent quality though the right side seems to leaning in. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 12:40, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
•  Support--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:29, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Halavar (talk) 19:57, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --XRay ^talk 20:32, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Great photo for the dark conditions; sometimes at night in conditions like these I've had trouble controlling glare from lights, though glare is handled well here. WClarke 05:29, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:24, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
•  Support — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 10:01, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Beautiful. --Laitche (talk) 20:06, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:01, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Bridges