Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Mostar, Stari Most at night.jpg

File:Mostar, Stari Most at night.jpg, not featured

Original

Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2009 at 11:07:49

Original

•  Info created, uploaded and nominated by BáthoryPéter -- BáthoryPéter (talk) 11:07, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Support -- BáthoryPéter (talk) 11:07, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Karelj (talk) 15:15, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Acarpentier 15:48, 1 January 2009 (UTC) moved bellow --Acarpentier 04:15, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Something is wrong with this picture. Maybe its (un)sharpness, or the fact that almost half of the photo is totally black. →Diti the penguin — 16:11, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Excelent image! Vanjagenije (talk) 16:14, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Support very nice -- Gorgo (talk) 17:09, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Georgez (talk) 21:08, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose All the buildings are leaning to the left, and there is a lot of posterisation in the sky. Images like this are more effective when taken at dusk rather than at night. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 23:06, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per MichaelMaggs --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 12:04, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Too dark. -- JalalV (talk) 13:15, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose - it is too dark.--Avala (talk) 15:14, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. JalalV (talk) 10:35, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Rotated

Rotated

Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2009 at 02:25:07

•  Info Alternative version, reduced leaning and brighter stones in the left bottom corner. -- BáthoryPéter (talk) 02:25, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Support -- BáthoryPéter (talk) 02:25, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Support--Umnik (talk) 15:19, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Good light! Calandrella (talk) 17:22, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:04, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Acarpentier 04:15, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose This picture should and could be way sharper. Nice composition though. --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 12:05, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose - too dark. Image of higher quality can surely be made.--Avala (talk) 17:12, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Agree about the sharpness. /Daniel78 (talk) 18:00, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Rather nice. It mustn't allways be downsampled gigasized panos but for a single shot the sharpness is insufficient. I assume it's caused by motionblur or an active image stabilizer while doing long time exposure. --Richard Bartz (talk) 21:45, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

 CommentI haven't image stabilizer (Nikkor 18-70) and I used a Manfrotto tripod. Noise reduction wasen't necessary, Nikon D50 at ISO200 is not noisy. For that matter in this picture I came to like this pleasant softness, its satisfying me ...but it seems disturbing for You. So I understand You --BáthoryPéter (talk) 23:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Maybe it's the lacking border sharpness at open aperture f/3.8 @ 27mm on this lens which causing this effect. MB was only a assumtion as the exifs or lens details in the description aren't really expressive :-) --Richard Bartz (talk) 00:34, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

•  Support terrific --Jeses (talk) 22:45, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Too dark. -- JalalV (talk) 13:16, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Support It's too dark and maybe bit unsharp, but I like it. —kallerna™ 19:38, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Karel (talk) 19:44, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

result: 8 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. JalalV (talk) 10:35, 13 January 2009 (UTC)