Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:St Patrick's Church Nave 2, Dundalk, Ireland - Diliff.jpg

File:St Patrick's Church Nave 2, Dundalk, Ireland - Diliff.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2015 at 18:02:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:St Patrick's Church Nave 2, Dundalk, Ireland - Diliff.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:St Patrick's Church Nave 2, Dundalk, Ireland - Diliff.jpg

3219

923

2627

3927

9041

7097

I mean something like that...

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
•  Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff -- Diliff (talk) 18:02, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support -- Diliff (talk) 18:02, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support -- Alex Florstein (talk) 18:34, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose Too dark for me and the composition is too busy for me, with many uninteresting/ordinary things. I would have chosen a portrait framing, with a focus on the stained glass window and the mosaic around, which is rich and colorful... Well, be bold and go ahead with your tripod, just in front of the altar, chose the choir, add maybe the columns left and right, and avoid the rest !--Jebulon (talk) 19:39, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • I try to show show the interior as I saw it. If it's dark, I leave it dark. I suppose I could brighten it a little bit without changing it's ambience, but I don't think it should be a bright looking interior. I thought the symmetrical confession boxes framed the sides nicely, but I suppose for a Catholic, they are quite ordinary. ;-) Diliff (talk)
•  Oppose Not extraordinary this for me,and also a few dark --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 19:53, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Could this be another revenge vote though? They always seem to come immediately after someone opposes one of yours. You say it's too dark, but please consider that it's actually a dark interior. Look at the colour of the wooden confession boxes. Compare them to the confession boxes in your recent nomination. Yours are significantly darker and the wood looks quite similar to me. I think you need to consider that not every church is a whitewashed baroque church like the ones you usually photograph in Rome. Some of them are dark, and should be shown as dark. Just my opinion anyway. Diliff (talk) 21:51, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

You're boring, another vote for revenge (?). where are the white churches?. Besides, this have very light compared to the churches of Rome (see that big window). Accept Negative Ratings. Besides the church do not like, it is distorted and dark.--LivioAndronico ^(talk) 22:35, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

I may be boring, but you're just plain rude. Once again, I don't really understand what you're saying and you don't seem interested in actually responding to the point I made about the darkness, so I'll just end the conversation here. Diliff (talk) 22:44, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Bravo, stop here and you grow up a little--LivioAndronico ^(talk) 22:58, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Sigh,...Poco² 09:19, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

•  Support but crop is a bit tight on top. --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:58, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Smaller church, apparently, so I don't mind. Daniel Case (talk) 20:41, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • It's actually quite a big church. This is the view from about half way down the nave. This is the view from near the rear. It seems to be that you can't please everyone. I thought the view from this position showed the altar and mural in enough detail to be interesting, but still wide enough to show the other features of the church, but Jebulon thinks it should have been tighter and closer, Uoaei1 thinks it's too tight at the top (it's very wide angle already, any more and I'd start getting complaints that there is too much perspective distortion), and you seem to imply you'd prefer to see it from further back? Can't please everyone. ;-) Diliff (talk) 21:51, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry if you thought I didn't like it ... can't say I blame you for feeling a bit defensive after the drama above. All I meant was that, since it looked from the image like it wasn't a very big church (there was no way to know you were only standing halfway back), the failings other people were complaining about were not an issue for me. I have no problem with where you took the image from. Daniel Case (talk) 16:49, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Understood, I didn't interpret it as you disliking the image, per se. It was just a brief response to you about its size, and then a longer moan about the whims of everyone else, so I suppose it's my fault that we got crossed wires! Diliff (talk) 17:41, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

•  Comment. I've uploaded a new image - brightened slightly as per Jebulon and Livio's comments, wider framing at the top as per Uoaei1's comments, and also fixed a slight tilt issue. Diliff (talk) 22:06, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support as always. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:48, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support No complaints. --Johann Jaritz (talk) Johann Jaritz 03:02, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:43, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --Hubertl 06:03, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support no doubt --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:27, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:32, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support absolutely. --Code (talk) 07:07, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support not dark enough for a church ;-) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:22, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 08:23, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Excellent as always :) --Laitche (talk) 08:52, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Poco² 09:19, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --DXR (talk) 09:39, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Many churches are quite dark inside, that's hardly the photographer's fault. Many details are visible, e. g. the coats of arms of the different guilds. The photo is a good illustration of this specific church. --Tremonist (talk) 12:14, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --Hockei (talk) 16:16, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support--ArildV (talk) 08:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Kruusamägi (talk) 10:32, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --Hockei (talk) 17:53, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Ups. Double vote, Sorry. --Hockei (talk) 19:33, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 22:30, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings