Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:360º Panorama Saulakopf.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:360º Panorama Saulakopf.jpg, featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Feb 2011 at 18:33:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created by Alex.vonbun - uploaded by Alex.vonbun - nominated by Alex.vonbun -- alex.vonbun (talk) 18:33, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Support -- alex.vonbun (talk) 18:33, 17 February 2011 (UTC)- Support -- Thomas888b (talk) 19:33, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 18:45, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support Spectacular panorama! --The High Fin Sperm Whale 19:40, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support --Cephas (talk) 22:18, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
Oppose- It isn´t an issue. There is the Lake of Constance, that´s the reason why the horizon doesn´t look straight. Location|47|04|47.14|N|9|46|05.90|E --alex.vonbun (talk) 15:40, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
Neutral Checked on google earth and other pictures. It seems you might be right. With the little doubts left in me, I'll remain neutral. - Benh (talk) 20:31, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- i can´t understand your doubts, it´s a pity --alex.vonbun (talk) 17:07, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- So you do answer questions sometimes (you haven't on your previous noms) ! I've found similar panos with straighter horizon, but also some pics with that "depression" in the horizon line. So I'll stuck to my neutral position on that one. - Benh (talk) 22:21, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- i can´t understand your doubts, it´s a pity --alex.vonbun (talk) 17:07, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- It isn´t an issue. There is the Lake of Constance, that´s the reason why the horizon doesn´t look straight. Location|47|04|47.14|N|9|46|05.90|E --alex.vonbun (talk) 15:40, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:10, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support --Böhringer (talk) 20:32, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose Nothing special compared to other featured panoramas. All rather soft too. W.S. 08:39, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- If you do it ever in your life walking to get to this level, then you would feel that here is "special". From the observation and the information content of the surrounding topography apart. --Böhringer (talk) 12:06, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- Walking has nothing to do with it, please keep your comments neutral. The nothing special concerns a to high vantage point capturing to much sky and to little foreground making viewers yearning for more. W.S. 13:43, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- If you do it ever in your life walking to get to this level, then you would feel that here is "special". From the observation and the information content of the surrounding topography apart. --Böhringer (talk) 12:06, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support --Petritap (talk) 08:21, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support. I want to go there. mgeo talk 18:22, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
- Support very good panorama picture, even lighting. --McIntosh Natura (talk) 20:46, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 11:53, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas
