Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Semuc Champey, Guatemala.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2014 at 16:12:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pools of Semuc Champey, Guatemala
  • I can fix the overexposure if needed I've fixed the overexposure, let me know if it is better. Now, I'm sorry to have failed both of my attempts at interpreting what makes an image go “wow” on Wikimedia. I've tried my best though—I'm new over here but I've been doing a lot of reading in order to understand the rules the best I could. I acknowledge that this is quite a subjective matter and respect any point of view but after seeing some simple basic building pictures being approved, I thought “how come a natural and beautiful place such as Semuc Champey could not produce a wow?”. I guess I was wrong, sorry again. --Christopher Crouzet (talk) 16:25, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'll have a look at the new version later (busy just now). I think this suffers a bit from not being eye-catching in the small preview and from the rather remote flat aerial view. The subject itself is certainly wow, but you've got to capture that. I encourage others to click on the picture as it does look better larger. -- Colin (talk) 18:22, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for the feedback—I understand your point of view and agree with it. I've just updated the file with a new crop that focuses more on the pools by stripping out the foliage on the left part of the image. Not sure if it's enough to fix the issue in the small preview, maybe there's simply no way out. The jungle there didn't give me much choice about the locations from where I could take a snap—only one lookout was available afaik. But I've got a close-up shot from down there if it can be of any interest: https://www.flickr.com/photos/christophercrouzet/11780516846/ --Christopher Crouzet (talk) 19:27, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support The crop helps. I'm sufficiently wowed. I've looked online too and this is one of the better ones. Your close-up Flickr pic is a bit over-exposed (blown whites) but if that was fixed it could be a QI. I like your File:Copacabana, Bolivia.jpg pic-- certainly worth a shot at FP (bearing in mind the 2-photo-at-a-time limit). You're aiming high with nominating at FP for your first few images, but as long as you take a "win some, lose some" attitude then you'll be fine. And there's nothing bad about achieving QI for an image. Also consider if your pictures are superior to the ones illustrating Wikipedia articles. If they are, then use them there and they could be considered for Wikipedia FP, which has slightly different emphasis on Encyclopaedic Value. -- Colin (talk) 21:42, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Colin, thanks again for the feedback! I'll fix the overexposure bit in the other one and will post it in the QI section. I didn't post the photo of Copacabana neither in the FP nor QI sections because it has some stitching issues visible at full resolution and thought that this wouldn't be acceptable as per the quality requirements. Since the stitching was processed directly by the camera, there's no way for me to fix it. I've posted it instead as a candidate for the VI section but it sounds like it won't make it for an obscure warning that I don't understand yet. Also, yes—I love the Open Source spirit and like everyone my goal with Wikimedia is to share a few photos for anyone to use. Then it's even better if I can get some sort of recognition for my work but it isn't the priority. What I like so far about posting in the FP section is that it provided me with better feedbacks than I've ever had after years of Flickr. That's enough for me to make it worth it to post here and I hope that I can keep doing so for the photos that “wows” me (I'll aim for the other categories when more appropriate). To finish, I'm a bit hesitant at modifying Wikipedia pages with my own photos as it could fall in the category of “self-promotion” that I've read somewhere. A photo being better than an other is after all quite subjective, especially since I might be biased with my own work, so I thought I'd rather let that kind of changes to the judgement of others Wikipedians? --Christopher Crouzet (talk) 22:32, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Christopher: You stated you like the open source spirit. Then why are your photos uploaded here under CC BY-SA, while the same photo on Flickr is under CC BY-NC-ND? ;) I'm just curious. Usually my Flickr photos are uploaded under all rights reserved, but for those I upload here, they are also under CC BY-SA on Flickr. BTW I've followed your Flickr album. I'm the guy with called graphium evemon. Cheers. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 02:25, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've always wanted to make my code open source but have only recently been thinking about doing the same for my photos. As such, I'm doing the transition slowly, one photo at a time, by uploading them on WikiCommons. As I'm still not sure about the “consequences” of this politic yet, I won't update the licensing on Flickr for now. I hope this make sense (it doesn't necessarily for me). --Christopher Crouzet (talk) 12:18, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh no, don't leave it to text editor Wikipedians. In most cases I decide what is or isn't a suitable image for an article. You are no less an editor for using images and this concern over self-promotion is bunk. They don't seem to mind promoting their version of the text so you should have qualms about promoting your version of the illustrative aspect. In the rare instance that someone disagrees we discuss on the talk page, just as we would for any other kind of edit. Saffron Blaze (talk) 15:06, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'll reply later, on your talk page, as this is getting a little off-topic for this nom. -- Colin (talk) 07:49, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unfortunately, and as already stated above, there was no other chances for me to take photos because of the dense jungle. Either I could take snaps directly from down there, which was crowded with people everywhere like if it was Disneyland by the time I reached it, or from that lookout. I'll leave the climbing to the trees to others :) --Christopher Crouzet (talk) 12:18, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 03:04, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Semuc_Champey,_Guatemala.jpg&oldid=123695825"