Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Ggb03162006.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
- Self nomination Miskatonic 07:07, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Support Miskatonic 07:16, 20 March 2006 (UTC) This image was was taken from over 5 miles away!
- Oppose Apart from the lights the image is much too dark. The lights are overexposed. Its also too blurred and has therefore a useless high resolution. -- aka 07:55, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Comment The description of the picture does not identify the bridge. Furthermore it claims a copyright which contradicts the free licence. Roger McLassus 10:26, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- I think ggb means « Golden gate Bridge » in San Francisco... ♦ Pabix ℹ 11:29, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- I cannot follow this comment. The description clearly identifies the bridge: This is a high resolution image of the Golden Gate Bridge taken with a Canon Digital Rebel XT and a 100-400mm telephot lens. This image was taken from the East Bay which is over 5 miles away from the bridge.
- And the license is fine (twin license of GFDL and CC 2.5). Please note that free does not mean without copyright. --AFBorchert 19:37, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- When Roger McLassus wrote this comment, the description was not so precise. Only the category indicated which bridge it was. see this to be convinced! ♦ Pabix ℹ 21:53, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing this out, Pabix. --AFBorchert 22:18, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- I updated the caption. Silly me. I didn't think I needed to call it anything. It is only the most famous bridge on the planet. 63.241.70.5 23:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC) ;-P
- In the US, perhaps you mean? :P pfctdayelise (translate?) 04:59, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- I updated the caption. Silly me. I didn't think I needed to call it anything. It is only the most famous bridge on the planet. 63.241.70.5 23:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC) ;-P
- Thanks for pointing this out, Pabix. --AFBorchert 22:18, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- When Roger McLassus wrote this comment, the description was not so precise. Only the category indicated which bridge it was. see this to be convinced! ♦ Pabix ℹ 21:53, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose Fernando S. Aldado 11:19, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- Neutral It is an interesting shot but unfortunately it is too blurred at the only useful resolution. --AFBorchert 19:37, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
- NeutralACK aka, too dark. pfctdayelise (translate?) 04:59, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose I also think it is way too blurred. --Lumijaguaari (моє обговорення) 08:56, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Blurred where? There is some motion blur from the cars on the bridge other then that what is everybody talking about. It looks sharp to me.
- Oppose - MPF 00:06, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose Gordo 00:49, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose small (height), unsharp (ok, it's a night shot), cut at the bottom. Whats that black bar running from left to right, it ruins the picture. --Dschwen 09:59, 28 March 2006 (UTC)