Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Nagoya Castle.jpg

Image:Nagoya Castle(Larger).jpg

Original, not featured

•  Info This is a 3x3 segment stitched panoramic in Rectilinear Projection. Downsampled to Full HD size.
•  Info created by base64 - uploaded by base64 - nominated by base64 -- Base64 (talk) 14:36, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support -- Base64 (talk) 14:36, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Question Why such a drastic downsampling? You're jumping from 9X10 Mpx (less overlap and crop) to slightly over 2Mpx. From the guidelines: "it is important that nominated pictures have as high a resolution as possible" --S23678 (talk) 14:57, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

•  Comment I agree with above. The result (size mainly) is not very worth the a 3x3 pictures stitch, and all the steps you went through to. I guess this could have been a one shot catch, and a downsampled version would have given the same quality. Still a very nice building (and probably even better if a twice as big version is given). -- Benh (talk) 15:56, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

•  Support Vassil (talk) 16:49, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support well done. —αἰτίας •discussion• 19:38, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Comment The nomination speaks only about technique. Can you explain how the photograph we see is better as a result of the technique? Fg2 (talk) 21:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

   Comment The major reason for the stitch is for the perspective correction. --Base64 (talk) 01:57, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• There's no need for stitch to achieve perspective correction. Benh (talk) 21:20, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

•  Oppose No details in anything, bad lighting, very low quality of a common subject--Sensl (talk) 00:34, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

 I withdraw my nomination Size --Base64 (talk) 01:57, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

result: withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 11:59, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Larger size, featured

•  Info I'm such a fool. In this image, even the "golden fish" on the top can be seen. Please don't say "no details in anything". This is 8MP, bigger than the 2MP original--Base64 (talk) 01:57, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Info created by base64 - uploaded by base64 - nominated by base64 -- Base64 (talk) 14:36, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support -- Base64 (talk) 14:36, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support -- I fully agree with you. J-Luc (talk) 07:49, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support -- I like the quality! --Specious (talk) 09:45, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support -- high resolution and good quality, almost no tourists in the shot Ianare (talk) 15:21, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose "golden fish" is it what they are? Details are not good even trees are not good. the lighting is bad (sky). low quality. I do not like composition with ropes. What is "perspective correction" anyway? Why not to do it more natural?--Sensl (talk) 20:29, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

   Comment I suggest you read all this in English Wikipedia(en:Nagoya_Castle) before posting such comment. "On top of the castle are two golden imaginary tiger-headed fish, called kinshachi (金鯱); this motif is used as a talisman for fire prevention. They are said to be a symbol of the feudal lord's authority. " Why are there ropes?, those are not ropes. During World War II, the upper part of the castle is destroyed. The rock on the bottom is not. Back in 1525, there wasn't effective en:Lightning protection system and drainage pipes penetrating the bottom rocks. There are not occasional but permanent, refer to the image in 2005 Image:Nagoya_Castle_01.jpg. As Wikipedia said, the castle is open for public exhibition, with air-conditioning and elevators. Finally, If you don't even know what is perspective correction, I suggest you take a look at COM:QIC which there are 5 images require perspective correction. --Base64 (talk) 01:27, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

•  Support This image is so clear, my instinct was to clone out the drainage tube that goes from the roof to the ground which is much much smaller than the fishes that are there. I suggest that Sensl needs to perhaps wipe their monitor off (the occasional cleaning of the viewing mechanism is helpful for seeing things in the display). -- carol (talk) 20:42, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support really good, sharp and clear, good composition. --Mbdortmund (talk) 21:51, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose First, praise for sharpness and clarity, and for getting good color in the shachi. Automatic exposure often overexposes them, and they become nearly white; you've done well to avoid that. But second, in my view, the photo is dull. It's dark and dreary, not in a moody or interesting way, but in a way that begs for lightening. I suggest adjusting levels and curves to add light to the building (which I see as the subject of the photo) and the foreground. Even Photoshop's Auto Levels should help, and with work you can make this picture sing. While still keeping great color and detail in the shachi. I'll gladly support it when the "wow" is there. This photo has the makings of a real winner. Fg2 (talk) 02:05, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

   Info Thank you for your greatly useful comment, I did a in-place upload to correct the over-blue colour balance and adjusted the shadows. --Base64 (talk) 03:04, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

   Support That makes the mood much more appropriate (in my opinion). Thanks! Fg2 (talk) 06:07, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

•  Support Naerii (talk) 18:53, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Vassil (talk) 06:51, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Very impressive and outstanding quality. –Dilaudid 19:18, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support--libertad0 ॐ (talk) 20:03, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support A pity about the weather, but good quality. --Estrilda (talk) 20:56, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support-- Looks very nice. --Lošmi (talk) 14:29, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 11:59, 4 August 2008 (UTC)