Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Frankfurt Am Main-Panorama des Hoechster Mainufers zwischen Bolongaropalast und Ochsenturm von Sueden-20100524.jpg

File:Frankfurt Am Main-Panorama des Hoechster Mainufers zwischen Bolongaropalast und Ochsenturm von Sueden-20100524.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2010 at 22:07:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Frankfurt Am Main-Panorama des Hoechster Mainufers zwischen Bolongaropalast und Ochsenturm von Sueden-20100524.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Frankfurt Am Main-Panorama des Hoechster Mainufers zwischen Bolongaropalast und Ochsenturm von Sueden-20100524.jpg

•  Info created by Mylius - uploaded by Mylius - nominated by Mylius -- Mylius (talk) 22:07, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
• Panorama of 15 images stitched with Panorama Studio Pro 2
•  Support -- Mylius (talk) 22:07, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Support --The High Fin Sperm Whale 22:27, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Support --патриот8790 (talk) 09:16, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Support No question, it's a wonderful panorama :-) -- Ra'ike T C 09:35, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Sehr schön - Excellent --George Chernilevsky ^talk 10:54, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Support nice detail, good view --ianaré (talk) 11:13, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Support  fetchcomms☛ 12:54, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Question is this pic taken from a curve of the Main ?--Jebulon (talk) 17:15, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Yes, take a look at the embedded camera position using e.g. Google Maps. --Mylius (talk) 19:23, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Support --Tintero (talk) 18:21, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose - OK, I can imagine what some might think after seeing my oppose... But the picture feels tilted (but I've checked, and it's not). Also, I just don't feel impressed if we remove the fact it's a huge panorama. Lighting, pale colours, a bit washed out sky... all contribute to no wow to me. Good quality picture ? I think yes. Would I hang this up in my room ? I don't think so. - Benh (talk) 19:15, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
  • The RAWs used to stitch the image were developed using a colour temperature of 5400 Kelvin which is the „sunny daytime“ standard and even was in the times of analogue photography. No further saturation was added to make the image come as close to the actual colours as possible. Of course colours like e.g. seen here might seem more picturesque than above, but do they reflect reality? I think not. Not trying to convince anyone – just an explanation of my approach to photography. --Mylius (talk) 19:33, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Swans are overexposed. Just joking (yeah, I'm not funny), I think it is a great photograph and I find it impressive in itself. Could you just have a look at the note I have left on the picture, and either confirm that the antennas look like that on the originals or correct it? No need to restitch the whole thing I guess. --Eusebius (talk) 21:16, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
  • I really envy you for your eyesight. ;-) Especially since I spent hours watching out for stitching errors. The left part of the left antenna actually is a bit skewed, but the more prominent part to the right was an stitching error I've corrected (although via manual retouche in Photoshop since this is a part so small Panorama Studio doesn't even recognize it). Thanks for the hint! --Mylius (talk) 22:17, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
    •  Support then. I guess I was just lucky in finding that. --Eusebius (talk) 05:28, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 10:39, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Support I also appreciate the very natural colours. --Cayambe (talk) 13:59, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Support --Brackenheim (talk) 16:40, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Support -- Not very exciting, but solid quality and good composition, comparing favourably with our featured panoramas. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:21, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

• Joaquim, u are the one who started discussion to raise bar for FP, and to make them exceptional again, and yet u support "not very exciting" images... hmmm ? ;) - Benh (talk) 19:14, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

• Yes, because I rationally (the 'head') consider this picture to deserve FP status though emotionally (the 'guts') don't feel very excited. This means, of course, that I have full control of my body and mind... -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:52, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

• In my opinion, this is exactly the difference between an FP (guts + mind) and a QI (mind). I could go over your history, and would find you sometime opposed because bells weren't ringing, but maybe the pictures then also deserved FP. I think this is the point: not being afraid to oppose when you just feel like so. - Benh (talk) 08:21, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

•  Support Both my mind and my heart say: undoubtedly FP quality. -- MJJR (talk) 20:12, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:47, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas