Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Palacio Wilhelmshöhe, Kassel, Alemania, 2013-10-19, DD 01-03 PAN.JPG

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

File:Palacio Wilhelmshöhe, Kassel, Alemania, 2013-10-19, DD 01-03 PAN.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Sep 2014 at 10:30:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Blue hour panorama shot of the Schloss Wilhelmshöhe ("Wilhelmshöhe Palace") is a palace located in the Bergpark Wilhelmshöhe in Kassel, Germany. Although the site was used already in the 12th century as monastery, and later as a castle, the current palace was constructed between 1786 and 1798 for the Landgrave Wilhelm IX. The palace, as essential part of the Bergpark Wilhelmshöhe became UNESCO World Heritage in July 2013.
  •  Comment Temp of bulidling is a bit better. But sky is problem. If you see those statues on the roof - echoes are all around. On some other parts of roof edge there are visible retouche failures. Did you try with normal sky ? I would pixel-peeping, but those mistakes are pretty visible. --Mile (talk) 13:35, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment the color of the sky is a bit strange, it is not uniform. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:57, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I like the scene, but surely the blues are not right? This type of lighting is common here and it is simply yellow, nothing that could be corrected with WB w/o making everything else weird. --DXR (talk) 20:00, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    DXR: Are you suggesting to go back to the initial version? Of course that it is yellow, but this discussion whether the color lighting deceives the original color of the subject is a never ending discussion. Is the perception of the human eye (and camera) more accurate that the real colors of the subjects? I don't have a clear opinion about that. Poco2 20:34, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I am, mainly based on the look of the grass. I agree that it is hard (impossible) to get these ones right, but for sure I prefer a yellowish building to blue grass. --DXR (talk) 20:53, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, agree on that. I believe that the newest version addresses that problem Poco2 21:22, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support better. --DXR (talk) 10:22, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support :-) --XRay talk 17:01, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose. The last version you uploaded is better than the previous ones but I think the image has been pushed too far in processing. The sky is posterised (particularly on the right side near the trees) and the grass is showing signs of digging too deep into the shadows (colour information has been lost due to underexposure, it's blue in the darkest parts). I think you need to give up on the grass and let it remain underexposed, but this is another situation where bracketed images might have saved it. Also, there are a lot of weird ghost-like areas around the edges of the building, particularly on the left side. Diliff (talk) 21:51, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment OK, that's a tough one... I really like the image, and I'd love to support. There are minor flaws as already pointed out, and the picture tends to be overprocessed, but imo it's still within limits. I'm primarily concerned about the foreground. I'd say you don't need all that poorly exposed and overly pushed grass. Better crop it radically. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:37, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Martin Falbisoner, Diliff, Mile, everybody: I have took the raw files again and processed everything from scratch using different software but at the same time taking care of addressing all issues you have mentioned above. I think that the result is actually better, but would like to hear it from you :). Martin, I share your opinion and therefore will not easily give up. Btw, I forgot to mention that a few weeks before taking this shop the palace got the UNESCO World Heritage estatusPoco2 09:26, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Hmm, as far as the composition is concerned the latest version is much better. But - unfortunately - there are also some new issues regarding sharpness/noise. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:45, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Made also some improvements there on this version and the alternative Poco2 10:39, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Blue hour panorama shot of the Schloss Wilhelmshöhe ("Wilhelmshöhe Palace") is a palace located in the Bergpark Wilhelmshöhe in Kassel, Germany. Although the site was used already in the 12th century as monastery, and later as a castle, the current palace was constructed between 1786 and 1798 for the Landgrave Wilhelm IX. The palace, as essential part of the Bergpark Wilhelmshöhe became UNESCO World Heritage in July 2013.
  •  Info Alternative version with rectiliniar panorama Poco2 10:39, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Poco2 10:39, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose. Sorry, still going to have to oppose this one and will probably oppose all edits you could come up with on this image as the entire image still has the same issues with being pushed too far. The grass is a little better and doesn't have blue patches, but now the sky is very noisy, and parts of the building are now blown (red and green channels). I think when it comes down to it, you shot this image a little too late in the blue hour and the sodium lights were too overpowering. As they are quite monochromatic, they cannot be properly WB corrected so they will never look good when they are the dominant light source. Diliff (talk) 14:09, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose per Diliff and above. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 09:03, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Palacio_Wilhelmshöhe,_Kassel,_Alemania,_2013-10-19,_DD_01-03_PAN.JPG&oldid=134588956"