Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Vyborg June2012 View from Olaf Tower 06.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Vyborg June2012 View from Olaf Tower 06.jpg, featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Aug 2012 at 20:14:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info No panorama, all by A.Savin 20:14, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 08:56, 18 August 2012 (UTC)- Support Poco a poco (talk) 15:52, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
- Support -- JDP90 (talk) 16:28, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Oppose -- A very nice composition and an almost certain winner if it weren't for the hypersaturation. Maybe it can be solved. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 18:32, 19 August 2012 (UTC)- Oppose -- Per Alvesgaspar. Kleuske (talk) 21:02, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
- Info Author reduced saturation. - Benh (talk) 18:54, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
- Better, but not quite there, yet. The fact that it's a Danish town doesn't mean it's gotta look like Lego. Kleuske (talk) 09:53, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
- Please be more careful in comments, and read the file description page before assessing: it is not Viborg in Denmark, but Vyborg in Russia...--Jebulon (talk) 11:38, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
- Better, but not quite there, yet. The fact that it's a Danish town doesn't mean it's gotta look like Lego. Kleuske (talk) 09:53, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
- Support very nice, the colours look for me natural. I know such colours from Lunenburg, Canada --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:42, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
- Support very nice, and wow. --Gzzz (talk) 21:28, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
- Support --Böhringer (talk) 22:03, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
- Support now. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:57, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
- Support Tomer T (talk) 12:17, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
- Support Could author let know which lens exactly was used? I'm surprised by the lack of distorsion for 8mm (but of course it could have been straightened afterwards). - Benh (talk) 15:37, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
- It is Sigma 8-16mm F4.5-5.6, the file is included in this category. With some effort, you can get the distortion weaker than usual, but I've also corrected afterwards a little bit. - A.Savin 16:45, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks! And sorry for not having looked carefully before asking. - Benh (talk) 20:59, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
- And I didn't know a rectilinear 8mm lens exists... hence my question. - Benh (talk) 21:04, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks! And sorry for not having looked carefully before asking. - Benh (talk) 20:59, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
- It is Sigma 8-16mm F4.5-5.6, the file is included in this category. With some effort, you can get the distortion weaker than usual, but I've also corrected afterwards a little bit. - A.Savin 16:45, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Alvesgaspar... and also, the building in the foreground occupies too much space and does not contribute to the overall image, it alters the scale relationship of the elements. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 21:14, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose per Alves for me too. Sorry. Can you fix the problem without extra saturation? And please eliminate the CA (red/green). --Alchemist-hp (talk) 09:08, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
- Support --JT Curses (talk) 00:57, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- Support, definitely. Very good composition; colour balance and saturation are normal. --Alex Florstein (talk) 06:56, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 04:50, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture
