Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Toronto - ON - Schaft des CN Tower.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Toronto - ON - Schaft des CN Tower.jpg, featured
[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Feb 2011 at 15:47:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created by Wladyslaw - uploaded by Wladyslaw - nominated by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 15:47, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 15:47, 5 February 2011 (UTC)- Support Very educative demonstration of a rare optical effect, combined with an esthetic visualization. Composition could be a bit less centered, though. If only all illustrations in school-books were like that! --Nikopol (talk) 17:48, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support --Snaevar (talk) 18:07, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support Per Nikopol. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 23:18, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
Oppose Too much posterisation IMO; the concentric bands around the sun are a bit too obtrusive. The description also attributes the atmospheric effect here to w:Tyndall scattering, but I would have thought simple reflection was more likely, since I don't see any real difference in colour (just brightness). --Avenue (talk) 23:35, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
Neutral Interesting and quality's fair, but the angle doesn't show off the building much. -- IdLoveOne (talk) 03:05, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- the intention of this picture was not to show the structure of CN Tower, for this I had shot a number of other pictures --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:17, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- Well, it shows that the building is clearly tall and there's a circular structure on it, but IMO it's kind of hard to get a gauge for the uniqueness of the building since from this angle you can't see much. I guess that's a passive way of saying something more straight-on that shows a side of a really tall building seems better to me in most cases. It's interesting in that it shows a shadow of the building, but there's also so much dead space.. -- IdLoveOne (talk) 03:07, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- As a said: the building itselfe (here: the CN Tower) is only a derivative aspect of this picture. Therefore there is no need to show the architecture in a way you would surly do if you want to show the structure. The physical phenomenon was my first intention. On the other side this interessting and non common view straigt up shows as a beautiful graduation of blue tones; and this is in my view not dead space; on the contrary: it needs space. --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:17, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 11:46, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support Per Nikopol. Jon C (talk) 18:35, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- Comment Just to clarify although it is definitely Tyndall effect, but it is not rare. It is yet another image of a w:crepuscular rays, which all are shadows that arise through the Tyndall effect.--Mbz1 (talk) 19:28, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
- I agree that the shadow visible here is (the opposite of) crepuscular rays. But crepuscular rays do not have to arise through Tyndall scattering, e.g. when they are cast through steam or fog with droplets larger than the wavelength of light. Getting back to this image, it is at least not a good example of the Tyndall effect, because there is no overt colour change. And I am still not even convinced that it is due to Tyndall scattering, which by definition is caused by particles similar in size to the wavelength of light. Why do you think the responsible particles here are of this size? --Avenue (talk) 03:45, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 10:01, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support -- Marmoulak (talk) 09:03, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:25, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose Nice phenomenon but composition issue. I'd have used diagonal better, and set the top of the tower to the center of the frame, or using the rule of third thing - Benh (talk) 22:51, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose Too much posterisation W.S. 14:32, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 17:49, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural phenomena
