Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:PLace de la Concorde alignement.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

File:PLace de la Concorde alignement.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2011 at 16:41:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Alignement, place de la Concorde, Paris.
  •  Info all by Jebulon -- Jebulon (talk) 16:41, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Jebulon (talk) 16:41, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral On the technical side, I am quite happy with this image, as it displays good sharpness and all lens defects are well corrected. I might like a bit more of saturation, IMHO. The thing that keeps me from supporting this candidate is the composition. Quite a lot of street in the bottom part, lots of sky on top, neither of them adding anything to the image. I would try to get closer, using a wide angle lens. Hendric Stattmann (talk) 20:33, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for review. I can increase the saturation. I partially agree about the ground (partially, because as a parisian I find the empty and car-free place de la Concorde very nice (very rare !)), but strongly disagree about the sky, which is not empty and adds a lot (my taste). As for a wide angle lens, I'll be happy to give you by email my postal address, the you could send to me another lens as gift Clin...--Jebulon (talk) 23:53, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • I like the sky, and dislike the asphalt (this might be subjective though), however what I think is not working is the attempted demonstration of the "alignment". The overlap is too messy, as the distance between the elements is not legible. I believe is also not a characteristic view, as people walk on the side of the street not in the centre.--ELEKHHT 11:51, 15 June 2011 (UTC).[reply]
        • L'utilisateur ELEKHH écrit: "J'aime le ciel, je n'aime pas le bitume (cela peut être subjectif, néanmoins), par contre je pense que ce qui ne "marche" pas c'est la tentative de démontrer l'alignement. Le recouvrement est trop désordonné et la distance entre les éléments est impossible à déterminer. Je pense en outre que ce n'est pas un angle de vue charactéristique, puisque les gens marchent sur le côté de la rue et non pas au centre." -- 22:17, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
      • I'm sorry, due to my too bad english I'm not sure I understand the last sentence of your comment. Thanks for review anyway.--Jebulon (talk) 15:15, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • En effet, c'est un exploit de prendre cet endroit sans aucune voiture. Le ciel a une structure intéressante en effet et je le laisserais tel quel pour une photo à vocation artistique - mais ici il s'agit d'une documentation encyclopédique et il en découle une nécessité de se concentrer sur le sujet, quitte à négliger certains côtés décoratifs/esthétiques.Hendric Stattmann (talk) 22:17, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support It's a real WOW!-effect. I was in Paris several times, but Concorde without cars (or more correctly: with only one car) ...never seen. --Llez (talk) 16:20, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose per Elekhh, quite messy composition.. Also too much sky in the top and too much asphalt in the bottom.. Ggia (talk) 19:13, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Several issues: DoF is too great, blending just about everything on the same plane. Either a wide angle lens should have been used to exagerate the proportion of the fountain vs the background, or a long telephoto with a wide aperture to blurr the backgroung and separate it from the environment. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 20:41, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Really, nice! It makes quite a statement I think LittleFrog (talk) 23:19, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Nice lighting, but the alignement attempt is not quite successful here in my opinion, as each subject is obstructed and in the end, I only feel frustrated not to see them. I would have stepped on either side. - Benh (talk) 17:18, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Not very good composition, object is too small and lamp in the centre is disturbing. --Karelj (talk) 20:50, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Tomer T (talk) 17:46, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose No good composition Joe MiGo (talk) 22:43, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 20:08, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:PLace_de_la_Concorde_alignement.jpg&oldid=55827235"