Commons:Valued image candidates/Stringfellow's Barn (2012).jpg

Stringfellow's Barn (2012).jpg

promoted

Image
Nominated by	Jim Evans (talk) on 2021-02-06 12:33 (UTC)
Scope	Nominated as the most valued image on Commons within the scope: Stringfellow's Barn at Stringfellow Orchards
Used in	Global usage
Review (criteria)	Question Is this barn a listed landmark? Also, please eliminate the COM:OVERCAT. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:02, 6 February 2021 (UTC)  Comment Stringfellow Orchards is on the U.S. National register of historical places and this barn is part of it. I have tried to clarify that by adding the NRHP to the image page. -- Jim Evans (talk) 21:27, 6 February 2021 (UTC)  Comment Thanks. I find this barn nondescript, but the photo could be useful. But let's discuss categories a little more. Why do you think Category:Horticulture is useful? Isn't that overcat for the category of the orchard? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:26, 7 February 2021 (UTC)  Comment I find Categories confused. Some people want one thing some want another. I'm not sure they serve much of a purpose. The difference I see is an orchard can simply be trees, e.g. an apple orchard, whereas horticulture is the the science and art of growing fruits & vegetables which is what Stringfellow was famous for. -- Jim Evans (talk) 04:27, 7 February 2021 (UTC)  Comment That seems like more of an explanation for a Wikipedia article than a category for a photo of a barn. Can we see horticulture in the photo? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:18, 7 February 2021 (UTC)  Comment The scope seems well chosen to me; on the other hand we would have seen having a very beautiful image if you did not persist in degrading them: the clipping of the sky is bad and the sky itself is oversaturated. Do not touch the images until you have mastered the technique. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:11, 7 February 2021 (UTC)  Comment Fixed clipping  Comment Just to be clear, the sky was added, but it's a real sky. It was only lightened to avoid a gloomy picture and now the clipping has been muted. No increased saturation or other processing was applied to the sky.  Comment It is very easy to see the pieces of the initial sky in the left corner, you will have a hard time arguing that there is no image overprocessing. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:37, 8 February 2021 (UTC)  Comment Those splotches are not the original sky. The original sky was totally blown out white. The splotches happened somehow I don't understand when adding the sky. I have redone the image. -- Jim Evans (talk) 12:42, 8 February 2021 (UTC)  Support It's better, there is work and goodwill. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:31, 9 February 2021 (UTC) Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:24, 11 February 2021 (UTC)