Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Esztergom and Sturovo from Esztergom Castle (panoramic).jpg

File:Esztergom and Sturovo from Esztergom Castle (panoramic).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jul 2011 at 18:06:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Esztergom and Sturovo from Esztergom Castle (panoramic).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Esztergom and Sturovo from Esztergom Castle (panoramic).jpg

•  Info created by HoremWeb - uploaded by HoremWeb - nominated by HoremWeb -- HoremWeb ^{Place of Auditions} 18:06, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
•  Support -- HoremWeb ^{Place of Auditions} 18:06, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
•  Support --патриот8790^{Say whatever you want} 09:39, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
•  Oppose I don't like the framing. In my opinion, this should have been cropped to remove the foreground elements on the sides. I also feel frustrated to see only part of the closest building, at the botton. No wow, and horizon isn't straight. - Benh (talk) 09:55, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
•  Oppose nice view but poor quality and not optimal angle of view, building parts on left and right are disturbing as well here, sadly the church is truncated --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:27, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
•  Oppose as Wladyslaw and Benh --Berthold Werner (talk) 08:36, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

 Comment Benh: I cannot accept "I don't like framing" as an argument. It could be "I don't like colors" next time. Nevertheless, I accept the point about the cropped building. What do you think, what could I do with the horizon to be more straight? I tried to find a workaround, but couldn't. --HoremWeb ^{Place of Auditions} 19:28, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi, unfortunately, judging a picture involves some "subjectivity". I don't have the right to say the framing is not good, because other people might like it like that. But I have the right not to like it. I like taking panoramas too, and when I end up with similar disturbing elements in the foreground, I would keep only the center part of the whole thing. Using alternate projections might help to get more of the panorama. I don't know the exact conditions under which you took the sources photos of the panorama, but I believe you should have set the camera a bit farther ahead to avoid most of the elements in the foreground. This would have helped getting most, if not all, of the closest building at the bottom. To my knowledge, fixing the horizon is easy, provided your sources pics are aligned correctly (if you went through some sort of automated process, this might not be the case), and provided you use decent software such as Hugin. It's most of the time a matter of setting the "viewpoint" (hope I name it right) correctly. - Benh (talk) 20:05, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

• I add that although it could be considered a subjective matter, leaving the foreground elements like what we see here is to me due to a lack of practice (or just a bad habit) in taking panorama pictures, hence my oppose. I wouldn't oppose because of colors, unless it looks really unrealistic or whatever. - Benh (talk) 20:11, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

 Comment Taxiarchos: could you explain what do you have against the quality? I understand and accept your remarks on composition, but I would like to learn how to improve on quality side. --HoremWeb ^{Place of Auditions} 19:28, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

•  Oppose as Wladyslaw and Benh Scewing (talk) 04:23, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for all who took time to vote, and especially Benh for the explanations. I still in trouble with the horizon because it is not tilt but bent. I will check out for the software you've suggested. --HoremWeb ^{Place of Auditions} 21:00, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:00, 5 July 2011 (UTC)