Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Willis Tower.jpg

File:Willis Tower.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2009 at 14:10:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

InfoRecently renamed Willis Tower (formerly Sears Tower) in Chicago. Establishing shot for the re-branded entrance while showing the distinct three tiered building silhouette - by Dschwen (talk)
Support -- Dschwen (talk) 14:10, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Two+two=4 (talk) 14:22, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support good point of look --George Chernilevsky (talk) 16:16, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great shot. Still can't believe that it's not called "Sears Tower" anymore. -- JovanCormac 17:44, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

* Oppose the main tower is great, but there is a definate perspective issue on the left tower and also on the posts at the front of the building for me. Julielangford (talk) 18:03, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question How was this made (EXIF-data missing)? Canon 5D + fisheye-lens? I like this one, but it seems to bee curvy only on left hand side. —kallerna™ 21:40, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- 5D, 24mm lens, vertical pano (transverse mercator projection, keeps the main subject mostly straight), exposure blended. --Dschwen (talk) 21:45, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thanks, then it makes sense, Support, althought the colours are bit dull (cloudy weather, but it isn't your fault). —kallerna™ 21:49, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - Ahh, so it's is meant to look that way! sorry, I didnt realise and thought it was a verical stitching problem. I change my vote to * Support after the explanation. Apologies again, but I do not know how to strike out my previous opposing vote. Julielangford (talk) 23:26, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      - With <s></s> tags around your old votr. --Dschwen (talk) 23:48, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      - Thank you :) Julielangford (talk) 00:01, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Avala (talk) 22:07, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support really nice! --Leviathan (talk) 06:47, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Brackenheim (talk) 20:38, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ Interesting perspective. However, filled with small stitching errors (see notes). --S23678 (talk) 03:23, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for pointing those out. I'd ask voters to hold off on further opposes based on these, as I'll try to fix them today. --Dschwen (talk) 12:00, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Fixed. None of these was more than a one pixel displacement though. There are some areas in the image which are not pixel perfectly sharp. But overall I think the quality compares well with other candidates here. --Dschwen (talk) 20:38, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - Good job. --S23678 (talk) 04:57, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Claus (talk) 22:56, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It shows not the real (Verzerrungen) --ka ʁs tn 10:36, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Though distortion is always going to be a problem when shooting these types of images. Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 13:23, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /JovanCormac]]) 09:50, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Willis Tower.jpg

File:Willis Tower.jpg, featured[edit]

Navigation menu

Search