Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:20171128 Angkor Wat 5671 DxO.jpg

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

File:20171128 Angkor Wat 5671 DxO.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Aug 2018 at 07:25:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the central structure of Angkor Wat
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Cambodia
  •  Info created & uploaded by User:Jakubhal - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:25, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support - I expect this nomination to be controversial, so hear me out. We constantly hear pleas to pretend in photography that we aren't living in the 21st century, requiring photos to have no cars and even no people in them. And the question to me in regard to a tremendous tourist attraction like Angkor Wat isn't whether it's unrealistic to require that all photos of it include no people, either by arriving when it's closed or cloning them all out; it's whether the people actually make the photo less than excellent. And in this case, I submit to you that we have an excellent view of the most famous part of Angkor Wat, with two women in the center adding a splash of color and a welcome structural element (though not an ancient one) and some more people elsewhere being somewhat less obtrusive parts of the scene. Call it a juxtaposition of the digital age and an ancient temple complex if you like, but I think this photo is very good and deserves a feature (though I'd be sympathetic to changing the description to "View of the central structure of Angkor Wat with two women"). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:25, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:57, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Pudelek (talk) 09:13, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:30, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --XRay talk 17:39, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Agree and disagree with Ikan, so here comes the controversy... Agree that the description, and also the 3 categories, are not describing well the content. There are people on the picture, and these people in the center dressed with colorful clothes and mirroring in the water should obviously be mentioned somewhere in the file page. Otherwise, the subject is nearly wrong. Imagine the picture without these two women, it would have been completely different. The picture is only 62% from its original size, either cropped or downsized. Concerning the composition, there is too much sky compared to the bottom crop, and horizontally the main tower could have been positioned in the middle, so that the tourists visible on the left would have disappeared, and the temple would have stand much better within the composition. I agree that Siem Reap is usually crowded, and that such pictures with no tourist might be difficult to make, however, if you really want the buildings only, then you have 2 solutions : 1) patience, waiting until the place gets free 2) technique, taking two photographs with a tripod and clone out the intrusive elements in each after shooting. Then now the picture should be considered as it is : temple with tourists taking photographs of themselves. Is the action great ? Not really. Maybe a Buddhist monk walking, or a local child jumping would have made this image awesome, but here it rather shows the spectacle we have not paid for when purchasing the 37 US$ entrance ticket. I don't agree that the 21st century may justify weak sceneries with distracting elements as a modern way of life. There certainly are impressive architectural constructions with similar water reflection in non-touristic places, just you need to search and find. Here the photographer didn't search, as the attraction was perfectly located on the map, Angkor Wat being the major touristic site in Cambodia. Then, to make an exceptional picture of such classic destinations, you really have to find the special element or the particular situation that will make your shot original -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:05, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • My pleasure, too. I think this is a very good photo, but if it doesn't get the votes for FP, the reasons you mention could be considered the difference between a good and a great picture. I'll see whether more people pass judgment on it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:20, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Basile Morin, I have selected that picture among a dozen other, exactly because of the woman in red dress. The photo with that pair just looked more interesting than other more usual shots of Angkor Watt central structure. It is a pity I could not make a photo of rural life with Angkor in background but I think it is no longer possible. At least for an outsider who can enter the area only during a day. The place is overcrowded by tourists. I believe scene as you describe, showing local culture, may be now possible only if someone close the area and intentionally arrange it there. Sorry -- Jakubhal 19:46, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, this place is "overcrowded by tourists", especially between November and February, during the dry season with mild temperatures. But here there are 2 problems with them : 1) they are highly visible in the center, while the description of the image is "View of the central structure of Angkor Wat" only, and no ladies. 2) These women are taking pictures like pure tourists, and this action is particularly incompatible with the magic. Never will you find such pictures in a gallery, otherwise we would ask the photographer "hey, are you doing art or just snapshots in touristic sites with your mobile phone like these ladies ?" The temple is beautiful, the tourists action is not romantic at all -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:26, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jakubhal: I'm saying that it looks extremely unrealistic, that it was not photographed or processed correctly. Daniel Case (talk) 19:33, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Daniel Case: I have uploaded a new version, the light should be more natural now. Not sure if it solves your problem with sky. -- Jakubhal 20:12, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I can see what it was supposed to be now ... sort of a thin layer higher up that lightened the sky. But I still don't think the picture works enough for FA. Daniel Case (talk) 04:28, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Basile Morin (talk) 13:16, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:20171128_Angkor_Wat_5671_DxO.jpg&oldid=315357515"