Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Oswald State Park Beach.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Oswald State Park Beach.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Aug 2018 at 03:03:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Natural Scenes
Info created by Collinserigne - uploaded by Collinserigne - nominated by WClarke -- WClarke 03:03, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Support very nice landscape, well composed and quite a beautiful scene -- WClarke 03:03, 31 July 2018 (UTC)- Support Thanks for liking my picture, thanks CollinSerigne 03:41, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Oppose Unsharp. No wow. Seemingly out-of-focus. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 05:23, 31 July 2018 (UTC)- Oppose Sorry but this doesn't really come close to the quality we have come to expect from 2018 FPs.--Peulle (talk) 12:12, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose per Peulle; a shame as if it had been larger and sharper I would have given it serious consideration. Daniel Case (talk) 18:29, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Gerifalte, Peulle, & Daniel Case: I am not trying to create contention or be of disrespect, but in regards to the technical quality of this photograph I must say that we may be getting too pixel-perfect and picky. What exactly do you expect in "2018 FP," because I must say a Canon 80D is a plenty modern camera, and 16 megapixels shouldn't be considered not "large" enough. Okay, it is true that the focus/sharpness on the left could be somewhat better, but for online viewing at even a decent-sized resolution, it would not be of major concern, and I would be willing to say that one could easily make a perfectly acceptable 13x19 print even in spite of the sharpness. Besides the small downfalls in focus and sharpness, there still remain many other good qualities of this for FP: compositonally, the image is great, with lines from the trees and cliff leading down to the expansive vast ocean. And for me, a scene like this, with the cliffs and trees towering over the idyllic beach, has plenty of "wow factor." And finally, the exposure is near-perfect, there are no highlights that are too bright and no shadows that are too dark, which must of been difficult considering the difference in brightness of the sky and on the cliff. My point of all of this, extending beyond this single nomination, is where do you draw the line with technical quality vs. content and composition? Because it seems to me this nomination is being sunk for nominal imperfections while its other great qualities are being ignored. Thanks. wclarke 02:12, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- @WClarke: In my humble opinion, I feel that it just does not live up to the quality for an FP; it looks like a picture anyone could take with a point-and-shoot. I'm sorry, I really disagree. Check out User:Code's FPs for an example what I'd think a landscape FP would be like, or give a search for "Georg Scharf" on Google. This is not of FP level to me, sorry. Maybe someone else might think otherwise. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 03:03, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- All right, sorry if this sounds a bit harsh, but you asked for my opinion so you're going to get it, no sugar coating. In my opinion, the technical quality of this image falls far short of what is deemed "one of the best images on Commons". FPs aren't just good photos, they are - as the Guidelines specify - among the best available. You said it yourself; the sharpness is not good enough. The details are not there. There is also a great degree of noise in the green sections. For Pete's sake, there are even
chromatic aberrations in the trees! If you look at some of the current Featured Pictures in the same category (nature/landscape), you will see that the quality of the ones promoted far outshines this one. And speaking of categories, this image is uncategorized, which is actually an immediate disqualifier right there. Now, I will grant you that there are a couple of redeeming features - you mention the composition and I'll admit it's not bad. It's not enough, though. Let us then have a look at the "wow" factor. Firstly, remember that each image "speaks" to people differently. For some, this might be a lovely landscape evoking nice feelings, whereas to others, it may be "just another beach". The thing is, some reviewers here have looked at thousands of landscape images, so to be impressed, the image in question really needs to be great. My personal opinion is that to overcome the rather serious technical flaws in this image, there would have to be something truly amazing indeed; I'm talking tsunami/tornado/president on surfboard kind of amazing. The fact that I grew up in a town where beautiful beaches abound, may make it even more difficult to convince me. Better luck next time. :) --Peulle (talk) 05:05, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose per Peulle, particularly this last comment. But it's not too late to categorize the image -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:11, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Basile Morin (talk) 09:00, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
