Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Schloss Marienburg bei Raureif.jpg

File:Schloss Marienburg bei Raureif.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jun 2014 at 22:55:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Schloss Marienburg bei Raureif.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Schloss Marienburg bei Raureif.jpg

189

184

863

480

2205

1454

Horrendous banding in the sky around the castle.

•  Info created by Michael Gäbler - uploaded by Michael Gäbler - nominated by Michael Gäbler -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 22:55, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
•  Support -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 22:55, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose Sky around the castle needs to be fixed. I like the perspective and composition but not certain the focus choice is right. Do you have the same shot with the focus on the castle? Saffron Blaze (talk) 23:44, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
  • Again, I don't think it's a focus issue. f/32 (!!!) was used in this case so focus is almost certainly not the issue. The image is in focus, but will be significantly diffraction-limited. The castle is probably slightly softer due to atmospheric conditions. Diliff (talk) 11:47, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

• I don't actually care what the cause of the issue is. I just want to see it addressed. I will add I can't believe people are supporting an image with the technical issues this presents with. Saffron Blaze (talk) 16:22, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

• Well, what the issue is determines whether it could be addressed. ;-) I completely agree that the artifacts in the sky should preclude it from being supported and I suspect the others did not notice it. Diliff (talk) 07:11, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

•  Support Interesting composition. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:35, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:15, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Support -- Christian Ferrer ^Talk 17:12, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose. Artifacting in the sky (posterisation/banding). Diliff (talk) 07:11, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose f/32 is good for diffraction, bud not good for sharp images. + per Diliff. DE: F/32 verursacht bereits viel zu deutliche Beugungsunschärfe. Man sieht es am Bild. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:19, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose per above, sorry. --Ivar (talk) 05:11, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
•  I withdraw my nomination. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 12:57, 3 June 2014 (UTC)