Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Byodo-In temple.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Byodo-In temple.jpg[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Mar 2013 at 14:51:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created by Tonchino - uploaded by Tonchino - nominated by Tonchino -- Tonchino 14:51, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Support -- Tonchino 14:51, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 |
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: Poor light, no chance to be promoted, sorry --A.Savin 16:47, 2 March 2013 (UTC) | Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed. |
- I am unsure with A. Savin's (hope the name is spelled correctly) decision. The sky is burnt out thus it cannot be QI, but probably some reviewer think the colors or the golden light are interesting. I opt for undo
FPXbut would like to hear another opinion on it because I am too new on FPC. --Tuxyso (talk) 23:01, 2 March 2013 (UTC)- Unfortunately I think there are at least three problems here: First, the clouds are blown out (too bright to show anything other than white, no "texture"). Second, the building front is too dark, caused by the backlit situation (sun is in front of photographer instead of behind). Third, it the light really was yellowish, then a yellowish foreground is ok; but since this looks like the sun was quite high up in the sky, the light probably wasn't actually yellowish; instead, this looks like it was caused by white balance issues of the camera (due to the difficult light situation). --Kabelleger (talk) 09:25, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
- The fourth problem is that the subjet is cut off on the left (and the fifth the harsh shadows that result in many underexposed areas). Poco a poco (talk) 10:04, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
- Ok, it was just a question / idea. I have the impression that FPX is sometimes used too fast without giving a nomination a chance. I would also not support this photo. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:11, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
- I agree with Tuxyso. I would not support this, but for me it's not an FPX either. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:15, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
- Ok, it was just a question / idea. I have the impression that FPX is sometimes used too fast without giving a nomination a chance. I would also not support this photo. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:11, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
- The fourth problem is that the subjet is cut off on the left (and the fifth the harsh shadows that result in many underexposed areas). Poco a poco (talk) 10:04, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
- Unfortunately I think there are at least three problems here: First, the clouds are blown out (too bright to show anything other than white, no "texture"). Second, the building front is too dark, caused by the backlit situation (sun is in front of photographer instead of behind). Third, it the light really was yellowish, then a yellowish foreground is ok; but since this looks like the sun was quite high up in the sky, the light probably wasn't actually yellowish; instead, this looks like it was caused by white balance issues of the camera (due to the difficult light situation). --Kabelleger (talk) 09:25, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
