Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Back-scattering crepuscular rays.jpg

File:Back-scattering crepuscular rays.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Oct 2009 at 23:32:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Back-scattering crepuscular rays.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Back-scattering crepuscular rays.jpg

•  Info created by Mila Zinkova - uploaded by Mbz1 - nominated by -- NormanB (talk) 23:32, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Support -- NormanB (talk) 23:32, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Support -- Tseno Maximov (talk) 09:15, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Fantastic view --George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:43, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support - Darius Baužys ^{→ talk} 11:45, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Comment Very beautiful scenery. However, I have a few comments: there appears to be some lines / abrupt transitions in the upper part of the trees (similar to the ones which were in the bride/groom picture below). Also a tiny bit of colour noise reduction would improve the quality IMO. And last: the crop on the sides is a bit tight for my taste. Is there some image material left, which you cut away? --NEUROtiker ^⇌ 19:35, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I tried to correct some lines (stitching errors) and I removed some noise. The image was not cropped It is the way it was taken. The thing is that I was trying to do panorama with Golden Gate Bridge like this File:Crepuscular Rays Golden Gate Bridge and San Francisco.jpg and I did not want to reduce my zoom because the bridge was far away. Now I know I should have. If I see it ever again I'll try to do a better job. --Mbz1 (talk) 00:00, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

The transition still is too obvious for my taste, but the noise is much better! --NEUROtiker ^⇌ 16:31, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

•  Oppose I think promoting one picture is enough and I like the other one better. --NEUROtiker ^⇌ 19:05, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I respect your opinion, and I would have agreed with you, but on the other hand we have so many FP of the same (not even similar, but the same) insects and birds, that I thought it is OK to have those two images of a very rare phenomenon. It is OK with me, if only one is promoted, but honestly I'm dying to find out which one will win more votes on POTY if they both are promoted (It was my main reason for creating individual nomination). I believe the one that gets less votes on POTY could be delisted after the competition is over.--Mbz1 (talk) 19:28, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

•  Support Fantastic view --Böhringer (talk) 21:59, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support I was thinking to nominate it. ;o) Yann (talk) 22:01, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support /Daniel78 (talk) 22:52, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Jacopo Werther (talk) 08:34, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support though i am not 100% convinced by the crop/composition....still a nice photo. --AngMoKio (talk) 11:09, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --663h (talk) 12:33, 2 October 2009 (UTC)-
•  Support --Aqwis (talk) 13:03, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 13:07, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support -- Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 14:29, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Thank you for the nomination.--Mbz1 (talk) 00:17, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Great atmosphere. -- JovanCormac 07:20, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Highly impressive. Airwolf (talk) 08:46, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Very beautiful --Tiago Fioreze (talk) 12:03, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Hadn't wandered here for a long time, nice to see you haven't lost the "crepuscular rays" touch :) Benh (talk) 12:14, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

==== Alternative ====

Here's a panorama of two trees (not the one I nominated on QI, slightly different). I myself cannot say which one I like the best the first one of this alternative, so it is for you to decide. (I would not mind if both are promoted)

•  Support--Mbz1 (talk) 00:17, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support - Wow²! Jacopo Werther (talk) 06:53, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Bad crop on bottom. The other one is better. -- JovanCormac 07:20, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support They are different enough that IMO both can be featured -Muhammad (talk) 09:16, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Far prefer this one. The solitary tree in the near middle is the perfect element. Great picture! Maedin\^talk 12:42, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support I really prefer this one, although I agree that the bottom crop is not perfect. --NEUROtiker ^⇌ 16:31, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Aqwis (talk) 18:24, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I created an individual nomination down bellow per your comments and votes. Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Daniel78 (talk) 15:27, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural phenomena

The chosen alternative is: File:Back-scattering crepuscular rays.jpg