Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Notre-Dame de Rouen, Nave 20140521 1.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2014 at 19:28:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Info As I already wrote at another nom of mine, next to Diliff's, I´m also a big fan of the church interior photography by DXR. This one shows pretty good why. ;-) Quality and resolution are great and the pov with the choosen projection gives a good impression of the size of this cathedral. c/u by DXR - nominated by me -- mathias K 19:28, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
- Support -- mathias K 19:28, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
- Support impressive --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:56, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
- Support Thanks Mathias! To be honest, I found Rouen Cathedral very difficult to shoot since the side windows are pretty much hidden (it doesn't have side aisles, which imo is quite uncommon) and the modern chandeliers really are quite odd. Looking back, I would have preferred using the +/- 4EV technique I use now, but I think the result is still nice. BTW: Since shooting such a pano takes quite some time, I had the pleasure to have tour guides explain in English, French and German that the nave of the cathedral isn't actually that high compared to its peers. Nevertheless, to me, Rouen Cathedral is still one of the most impressive buildings. --DXR (talk) 22:23, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
- It does seem to be a very dark cathedral, and I think that (with the HDR processing, I assume it was Photomatix?) has the effect of giving it more of a typical overprocessed HDR look than some of your other images. It's funny how impressions of a church/cathedral's interior height can be deceiving. I was recently reading the List of highest church naves and there are some surprises there. The highest nave in the UK is not even a cathedral, it's actually a (not very attractive) church! The list seems to not be complete though, as Rouen Cathedral's nave is 28 metres high apparently and should make it onto the list, near the bottom. Diliff (talk) 07:50, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- Actually, back then, I processed it with Photoshop's merge to HDR. I understand and agree with your comments, but I actually quite like the look. I have run the source files through Photomatix and I am not convinced that the results I'm getting from that are better (I like how the contrast is actually not too high in the current version). Perhaps you would like to comment on that version. If I look up images on google, they all seem to have a somewhat odd look, so I guess it is somewhat innate to the church itself. Of course, everybody is free to judge the results and I certainly won't have any grudge against those who think that this version is not quite FP. --DXR (talk) 22:26, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- I prefer your Photomatix version I think. I can't say what is more accurate looking though (Photomatix tends to oversaturate colours). Diliff (talk) 00:06, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Actually, back then, I processed it with Photoshop's merge to HDR. I understand and agree with your comments, but I actually quite like the look. I have run the source files through Photomatix and I am not convinced that the results I'm getting from that are better (I like how the contrast is actually not too high in the current version). Perhaps you would like to comment on that version. If I look up images on google, they all seem to have a somewhat odd look, so I guess it is somewhat innate to the church itself. Of course, everybody is free to judge the results and I certainly won't have any grudge against those who think that this version is not quite FP. --DXR (talk) 22:26, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- It does seem to be a very dark cathedral, and I think that (with the HDR processing, I assume it was Photomatix?) has the effect of giving it more of a typical overprocessed HDR look than some of your other images. It's funny how impressions of a church/cathedral's interior height can be deceiving. I was recently reading the List of highest church naves and there are some surprises there. The highest nave in the UK is not even a cathedral, it's actually a (not very attractive) church! The list seems to not be complete though, as Rouen Cathedral's nave is 28 metres high apparently and should make it onto the list, near the bottom. Diliff (talk) 07:50, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- Support Wohow! ArionEstar (talk) 00:41, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- Weak Support. The HDR processing could maybe be improved, but the view and the subject is nice. Diliff (talk) 07:50, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- Support --Böhringer (talk) 09:29, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 17:46, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Support I don't think the HDR hurts it too much in this case. Daniel Case (talk) 14:24, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
- Support Looks alright. Has that light in the tunnel feel. --///EuroCarGT 03:34, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
- Support --Chmee2 (talk) 09:14, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 16:35, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors