Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Harbour in Mariehamn, Aland 16b9.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Harbour in Mariehamn, Aland 16b9.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Mar 2013 at 22:49:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created by Johannes Jansson - uploaded by Fæ - modified by Colin - nominated by Colin -- Colin (talk) 22:49, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Support A rather nice harbour scene from Åland, Finland. -- Colin (talk) 22:49, 10 March 2013 (UTC)- Support --Suid-Afrikaanse (talk) 00:04, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- Support nice, bg is a bit noisy but foreground is sharp. Mono 01:10, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Oppose Looks good when downsampled but at full size this is lacks clarity. --Pine✉ 06:24, 11 March 2013 (UTC)- Oppose I find the crop is too low (the clouds make a nice arc but are butted up right against the top of the frame; too much nothing at the bottom), and none of the objects appear to be in focus. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 06:38, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- Support Wonderful composition and colors. Only, the sharpness could be better. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:49, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- Support -- Great! Arcalino (talk) 08:11, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose Unfortunate crop to me. Lots of space at the bottom but the mast is cut away at the top. Sorry --A.Savin 08:38, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose per A.Savin. --Julian H. (talk/files) 08:56, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- Support I think the emphasis here is more on the beauty of the reflection. Everything may not be possible in a single frame. JKadavoor Jee 09:48, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Comment This image is modified from File:Hamnen i Mariehamn pa aland.jpg which is taller vertically. However even that version doesn't catch the top of the mast and possibly as a result leave the viewer all the more aware of that shortcoming. Instead, this version doesn't even try and concentrates on the reflections and the more interesting lower sky. If folk were to shift their oppose to support with the original crop (and nobody going the other way!) then I would create a new version alt (I've also applied some NR and removed a dust spot from the original). Wrt Pine's comment on sharpness, please can you judge an appropriately downsampled version rather than pixel-peeping the 10MP version. This is a six-second exposure so there will be some subject-movement on the water -- I'm rather surprised it was still enough for that! -- Colin (talk) 12:15, 11 March 2013 (UTC)- Support Nice! --Stas1995 (talk) 13:37, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose Pretty but per Pine. Movement in the water is cancelled out (blurred) by the exposure, so that is not a problem. The wooden poles however are not sharp neither and that, together with some CA is for me an issue. B.p. 15:07, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- Weak Support I don't find the composition ideal; having the top of the mast cut off looks a bit awkward. Still, the colours and the reflections make for a very eye-catching image. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 23:05, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- Support I specially like the colors and composition looks also all right. Kruusamägi (talk) 18:11, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose simply a bad crop. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 23:59, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
Neutral the nordic night is well capture (EXIF-time is is obviously wrong, taken much later ) but I'm not convinced about the crop.--ArildV (talk) 09:41, 13 March 2013 (UTC)- Oppose Upper crop is not good at all. --Vamps (talk) 17:58, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 7 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 13:33, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
