Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Seattle 3.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Seattle 3.jpg, featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Mar 2010 at 22:56:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info Seattle at dusk, from Queen anne Hill. Created, uploaded, and nominated by Dschwen (talk)
Support -- Dschwen (talk) 22:56, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Unsharp Steven Walling 23:55, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
- This is a joke, right? --Dschwen (talk) 01:15, 2 March 2010 (UTC) P.S.: If not please let me refer you to this file... --Dschwen (talk) 01:50, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- LOL ---Muhammad (talk) 08:53, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- See Kallerna's comment, it's not the whole photo. Also, I think it looks washed out and pretty boring for a cityscape. Steven Walling 17:26, 2 March 2010 (UTC)r
- Unfortunately your taste seems to be shaped by Flick. --Dschwen (talk) 21:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- Unfortunately your manners seem to be shaped by the fact you're a pompous snob. Steven Walling 03:51, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
- Now you are resorting to a purely personal attack with no connection to the topic whatsoever. Please don't do that. --Dschwen (talk) 02:05, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
- Unfortunately your manners seem to be shaped by the fact you're a pompous snob. Steven Walling 03:51, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
- Unfortunately your taste seems to be shaped by Flick. --Dschwen (talk) 21:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- See Kallerna's comment, it's not the whole photo. Also, I think it looks washed out and pretty boring for a cityscape. Steven Walling 17:26, 2 March 2010 (UTC)r
- LOL ---Muhammad (talk) 08:53, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- This is a joke, right? --Dschwen (talk) 01:15, 2 March 2010 (UTC) P.S.: If not please let me refer you to this file... --Dschwen (talk) 01:50, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- Support Good job Daniel! I believe you said you might put up some howto on the panorama stitching process. I wouldn't mind knowing what settings you use (aperture, focal length, ISO, etc.) too. I can't seem to figure out the right process. My edges end up being distorted and unsharp. --Dori - Talk 00:53, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- Support otherwise. –Juliancolton | Talk 03:15, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- Support Thanks. Takabeg (talk) 03:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- Support --George Chernilevsky talk 08:40, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- Support --Muhammad (talk) 08:53, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry, those branches in foreground are really disturbing. (The unsharpness that Steven Walling probably meant can be seen in the harbour in right hand side. IMO it's not that bad, considering the lightning conditions.) —kallerna™ 10:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- Support --Leviathan (talk) 10:37, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- Support --Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 12:33, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- Support --Böhringer (talk) 14:50, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- Support --Herby talk thyme 16:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- Support For me the compositional bonus beyond the normal "big city pano" is the bay at the right with the "forking" of the city. --Iotatau (talk) 09:36, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
- Support I don't see any significant technical flaws. Nice light. OK composition. Please improve the description by adding the names of the bay, the mountain and the tower. --MattiPaavola (talk) 10:40, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
- Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 22:17, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
- Support--Mbz1 (talk) 04:24, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /–Juliancolton | Talk 00:55, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas
