Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Chang Chun Shrine amk.jpg

File:Chang Chun Shrine amk.jpg, featured

Voting period ends on 14 Apr 2009 at 10:46:48

•  Info Chang Chun Shrine in the Taroko National Park, Taiwan
•  Info created, uploaded, nominated by AngMoKio -- AngMoKio (talk) 10:46, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Support -- AngMoKio (talk) 10:46, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Support   ■ MMXX^talk  11:14, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Aqwis (talk) 12:16, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
•  OpposeThe composition is good, but lots of blown out highlights on the waterfall.--Mbz1 (talk) 13:26, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
  • wow you set high standards. How would you make that picture? Show me a picture of such a waterfall on commons without some blown out highlights. --AngMoKio (talk) 14:24, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, if you do not like "blown out highlights", I could change the wording to say that the quality of the waterfall is bad IMO. Here are two samples of how I would like to see a waterfall File:Fulmer Falls Closeup 3000px.jpg;File:Vernal Falls Rainbow.jpg. Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:39, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Both have blown-out parts. --AngMoKio (talk) 15:48, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

File:Lady Barron Falls Mt Field National Park.jpg, long exposure, no blown highlights. Noodle snacks (talk) 01:04, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

•  Neutral For the waterfall I would have preferred either a faster exposure or a slower one. It seems uncomfortably in the middle somehow. --Dori - Talk 14:38, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Faster would make the forest and parts of shrine too dark..slower would blow out parts of the shrine (and i don't think that this waterfall looks nice with long time exposure). --AngMoKio (talk) 14:56, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Info here is a pic (not by me) from the net to show you more surroundings of the shrine and to give you an idea of the conditions. As you can see you also can't really get close to it to take such a shot. --AngMoKio (talk) 15:12, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Beautiful, maybe part of the top should be copped out --Muhammad (talk) 15:28, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Richard Bartz (talk) 16:08, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Neutral Parts of the top should be copped out. —kallerna™ 10:45, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Lošmi (talk) 14:43, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 18:28, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Paris 16 (talk) 17:03, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Support--HouseGhost^Discussion 12:02, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Support - Warddr (talk) 13:50, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Böhringer (talk) 14:37, 14 April 2009 (UTC) too late --Berthold Werner (talk) 18:11, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 2 neutral => featured. Berthold Werner (talk) 17:53, 15 April 2009 (UTC)