Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Abbaye Fontenay eglise facade.jpg

File:Abbaye Fontenay eglise facade.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jun 2014 at 08:53:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Abbaye Fontenay eglise facade.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Abbaye Fontenay eglise facade.jpg

•  Info All by by Myrabella -- Myrabella (talk) 08:53, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Info I would like to propose a photo of a monument with some human presence and spirit. The plain composition of this image of the church of the abbey of Fontenay aims to call up the intended simplicity of Cistercian architecture -- Myrabella (talk) 08:53, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Support -- Myrabella (talk) 08:53, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Support per my comment QI.--ArildV (talk) 21:42, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Support -- Dey.sandip (talk) 07:42, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
•  weak support Great composition, especially with the man, but it doesn't have enough detail to the building to warrant a full support from me. --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 12:44, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:47, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Support -- Christian Ferrer ^Talk 05:45, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Support --P e z i (talk) 10:59, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Comment -- Was this sharpened at all? That aside, this would be a much lesser image without the scale reference. Saffron Blaze (talk) 13:19, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose -- Correct picture, trivial composition. Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:17, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose I'm sorry, but the light, sharpness and composition doesn't appeal to me. --Ivar (talk) 19:34, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Ivar. Kruusamägi (talk) 22:19, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
  •  Done The image has been sharpened and a bit more contrasted. --Myrabella (talk) 06:41, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

 Support -- I think the human element takes this out of the banal. The adjustment met my concern. Saffron Blaze (talk) 14:34, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

•  Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:05, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Weak oppose Interesting subject, quality acceptable and lighting ok to me, but none of them outstanding. On the other side, the composition is too simple, resulting in a flat picture lacking perspective feeling. Poco² 16:59, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

•  Info @Poco a poco: The composition is totally intended. This is a Cistercian church. Cistercian architecture was deliberately simple, utterly sober, even austere, with as less ornementation as possible and if any, it was kept strictly simple. So my intend was to refer to this style by a straight and simple composition. At the same time, the Cistercian Order developed a great spirituality - to me, referred in the image by the windows inside the building (note their geometric motives), and the man entering. --Myrabella (talk) 18:51, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

• understand your comment and assumed that the composition is intentionally like it is, but overall I am not convinced with the static result. If you wanted to shoot the facade from a parallel plain then I'd have at least tried to capture more of the grass (like here) to give to the picture some dynamic with help of the lines of the mowing machine. Poco² 11:58, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

• I tried it! Thank you for the review anyway. --Myrabella (talk) 13:45, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Your current nom is the superior image because of the inclusion of the human element. A combination of the two might have been better but I am happy with my vote. Saffron Blaze (talk) 15:38, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

•  Support--ℳ₪Zaplotnik^contribs 13:37, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 19:04, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings