Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:New York City at night HDR.jpg

Image:New York City at night HDR.jpg, featured

•  Info created by Paulo Barcellos Jr. - uploaded by HighInBC and Sandstein - nominated by Husky -- Husky ^{(talk to me)} 22:25, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
• HDR image of New York City at night. Stunning lightning, nice perspective. Reminds me of Blade Runner
•  Support -- Husky ^{(talk to me)} 22:25, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Like some weird movie. Doodle-doo Ħ 22:31, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Neat effect! Nice work with HDR. What did you use to blend the images? JaGa 23:06, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Unfortunately, i didn't take the picture :) Paulo Barcellos Jr. did Husky ^{(talk to me)} 06:53, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Looks great. CO₂ 23:11, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --Thermos 05:43, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support _{Love it} love it ^{love it} LOVE IT!! --Ben^chat 06:03, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Very nice picture, very nice effect! --Python 06:26, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Romary 06:50, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --Leafnode 06:56, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose Poor quality at full res - unsharp, ghosting, noisy. Also what's with the weird vortex light thing on the upper and lower RHS? --Fir0002 www 08:10, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose - Quality not good enough despite WoW. Maybe a denoising filter could help. Alvesgaspar 08:46, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose not bad, but not really sharp. --Beyond silence 09:15, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Is sharpness your only quality for evaluating photos? For your information, it's almost impossible to make razor-sharp photo with that kind of lighting --Leafnode 10:44, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
    • I don't think so.--Beyond silence 11:04, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
      • Second that - check out some of Diliff's night shots... --Fir0002 www 12:01, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
        • I've written almost - I know that it is possible, but very difficult, so I think in this shot sharpness should not be evaluated that thoroughly. I've written that mainly because Beyond Silence seems to have strance evaluation criteria. --Leafnode 12:05, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
        • And Diliff is not a fair comparison, because it's the sharpest by far over here, and he gets these results by strong downsampling of the pictures he takes from an already top notch combination of camera/lenses. Benh 21:27, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose Ack Fir002 --Richard Bartz 17:46, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --Karelj 19:53, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --Acarpentier 00:33, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose Nice mood, too noisy (dirty window?) and unsharp though. Dori - Talk 02:13, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Tbc 18:34, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support wow effect --Jklamo 01:45, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Great image, lots of detail, sharpness more than acceptable given the technical difficulties and good example of the power of well-used HDR. --Nattfodd 12:47, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose Quality in full resolution is not good enough and there are many overexposed parts. --startaq 13:40, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Startaq. --MichaelMaggs 17:49, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Despite flaws mentioned by opposers, because of WOW and mood. I also believe this is a nice exemple of a proper use of HDR. Benh 21:27, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose Poor quality. Lycaon 17:33, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support It's true the quality is not very good, but the ambiance saves the picture IMO. Reminds me Blade Runner. Sanchezn 21:04, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support It has this nice irreal 'futuristic' look, I like it. --Atoma 08:41, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Very well-used HDR. --Aqwis 13:17, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Technical flaws mitigated by strong wow and good mood. -- Slaunger 21:08, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose Ack Fir002 Freedom to share 19:26, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

result: 19 support, 9 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer 15:38, 18 October 2007 (UTC)