Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Водопад на Емиричка Река.jpg

File:Водопад на Емиричка Река.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2023 at 19:25:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Водопад на Емиричка Река.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Водопад на Емиричка Река.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#North Macedonia
•  Info All by me. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:25, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:25, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
•  Neutral Nice waterfall but not spectacular FP-level. ★ 19:33, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

• I nominated it primarily because of the great ambient produced by the combination of spring and autumn colours.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:36, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

  Right, but definitely it’s not one of your best works at all. ★ 20:05, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

•  Support Beautiful composition to me, and I like the color contrast noted above. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:17, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Colors look washed out to me. I think a polarizer would have helped. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:21, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment Added the missing section anchor to the gallery link. I fear I have spoiled nominators by always silently correcting such oversights; they are getting lazy. ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 06:53, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
•  Support per Ikan – not often is North Macedonia associated with nature. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:32, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

• It is to me: see some nice insects. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:06, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose Per King of Hearts. -- Karelj (talk) 12:11, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
•  Support - ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 20:30, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Motion blur and dull light. Washed out colors, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:44, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose it seems the diaphanous quality of the ambient illumination lends a peculiarly diffused characteristic to the highlights, indicating a possible compromise on the specular details. This could be attributed to an inappropriate shutter speed-aperture combination, rendering the water's kinetic energy with a suboptimal motion blur, diminishing the intended dynamism. The tonal distribution across the histogram, specifically in the regions denoting midtones, may suggest a misalignment with the desired zonal methodology. The waterfall, although central in theme, appears to wrestle for visual prominence, indicating a potential miscalculation in rule-of-thirds positioning or perhaps a focal length that didn't sufficiently compress the scene's depth. IMHO, there's a discernible disparity between the sharpness in the foreground and the cascading elements of the waterfall, hinting at depth-of-field inconsistencies. This could result from an aperture selection that did not sufficiently prioritize hyperfocal distance, especially crucial in landscape compositions of this nature. The juxtaposition of the autumnal leaves against the verdant backdrop, while thematically promising, appears slightly desaturated, raising questions about white balance choices or even the color profile embedded during post-production. This, combined with the previous technical observations, suggests that a more rigorous approach in both the capture and post-production phases might be advantageous. --Wilfredor (talk) 23:42, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
•  I withdraw my nomination --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:41, 19 October 2023 (UTC)