Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Pico de Fogo & summit of 1995 erruption.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Pico de Fogo & summit of 1995 erruption.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2011 at 17:46:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Info created, uploaded and nominated by Ximonic -- Ximonic (talk) 17:46, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- Info Pico de Fogo is a 2,829 metres high stratovolcano in Fogo, Cape Verde. In front of it there is a minor summit which was formed in an eruption in 1995. This volcanic landscape has been taken in 2010 December.
- Support -- Ximonic (talk) 17:46, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- Support I like it! Only two hiccups - the composition seems a little off-balance to me, with the volcano so close to the top and the left edge, and the shadows in the foreground on the right seem too dark and imposing. Apart from that, great photo, great volcano. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 17:56, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- And it seems slightly tilted CCW, or is this just because of the terrain? --The High Fin Sperm Whale 17:57, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- It is hard for me to say if is the picture really tilted. The sure thing is the terrain certainly wasn't flat and horisontal – hilly every way around. But I have used a water balance thing which is included in my camera. I can fix the seeming tilt if it disturbs too much though. Also the image can easily be cropped every way, but maybe I'd like to wait for more opinions about it so I can be sure where to crop (or clone more sky). Thanks. --Ximonic (talk) 18:20, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- I just wanted to add, for the record, that I never saw any tilt, but I know what Whale is referring to. I live near mountains and it can be frustrating when you pictures are level, but the mountains going off into the distance, plus varying heights, make the image look like you can't hold a camera for your life. But in this case, I never saw it and I still don't; but if anyone does see a tilt, it's definitely because of the landscape. If it bothers too many people, obviously it can be fixed. ; ) – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 00:56, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- It is hard for me to say if is the picture really tilted. The sure thing is the terrain certainly wasn't flat and horisontal – hilly every way around. But I have used a water balance thing which is included in my camera. I can fix the seeming tilt if it disturbs too much though. Also the image can easily be cropped every way, but maybe I'd like to wait for more opinions about it so I can be sure where to crop (or clone more sky). Thanks. --Ximonic (talk) 18:20, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- And it seems slightly tilted CCW, or is this just because of the terrain? --The High Fin Sperm Whale 17:57, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
SupportNeutral I think the "tilt" may be the terrain; I don't see anything it can really be judged by. I'm hoping the soft blur at the top is smoke from the volcano? – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 18:05, 25 May 2011 (UTC)- The soft blur... Atleast it can't be made by me. I don't know, huh? :D I don't remember that kind of stuff so it must have been really hard to notice if there were smoke. Atleast it is an active volcano. --Ximonic (talk) 18:25, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Nope, definitely not you, butit looks like a very fine dark cloud of ash or smoke right dead center. I don't think there's anything that can be done about it though. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 00:56, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- The soft blur... Atleast it can't be made by me. I don't know, huh? :D I don't remember that kind of stuff so it must have been really hard to notice if there were smoke. Atleast it is an active volcano. --Ximonic (talk) 18:25, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
- Actually, maybe it is you. Is this image composed of two images stitched together, and did you use a polarizer filter for these images? – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 00:58, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, it is a stitched panorama. I didn't change the camera settings between any picture. No polarizer was used, just the lens itself. --Ximonic (talk) 12:16, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Furthermore the panorama is something like 150 degrees wide so I guess the changing of the sky is natural and can't be avoided (unless by digital manipulation). --Ximonic (talk) 12:40, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Ok, if you didn't use a polarizer then that rules that out. I suppose it is just haze. Unfortunately, I find it really distracting and I'm not sure why, so I'm really on the fence. But it's still a nice shot! – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 13:07, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Actually, maybe it is you. Is this image composed of two images stitched together, and did you use a polarizer filter for these images? – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 00:58, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Support -- Raghith 04:47, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose no wow for me -- /人◕ ‿‿ ◕人\ 苦情処理係 10:32, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose Interesting but not FP: there is nothing exceptional --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:34, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Comment I don't understand this at all... Commons does not show the right picture in the previews at all! It doesn't show the updated images after the first release. However... --Ximonic (talk) 18:25, 26 May 2011 (UTC)Up to date now. --Ximonic (talk) 13:58, 27 May 2011 (UTC)- Support -- Great quality and very interesting scene. Azeri (talk) 13:07, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose Looks like an oversharpened resize of a multi-image panorama. Pano's should be mentioned in the description, BTW. W.S. 22:47, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose contrastless, heavy chromatic aberrations --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 10:25, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Alternative[edit]
- Info Just providing a different crop --Ximonic (talk) 18:52, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Confirmed results: