Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:St James's Church Interior 2, Spanish Place, London, UK - Diliff.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:St James's Church Interior 2, Spanish Place, London, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 May 2015 at 15:25:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff. Quite a beautiful Roman Catholic local parish church in London, with lots of visual interest in the frame. -- Diliff (talk) 15:25, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Support -- Diliff (talk) 15:25, 27 April 2015 (UTC)- Support Incredible acutance and wonderfull sharpness. -- Christian Ferrer 17:45, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
- Support. Though with the thumbnail sharpening, it's too much local and too little global contrast imo. I get dizzy looking at that. (Not your/the images' fault) — Julian H.✈ 18:10, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
- I know what you mean, I thought the same thing looking at the thumbnail. I can try adjusting it but it looks okay at full size IMO. Diliff (talk) 18:22, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, it looks fine at full size. I think it's actually bad luck that the detail frequency of the photo matches the pixel size here in the thumbnail pretty well so that the sharpening works exceptionally well, i.e. is too strong. — Julian H.✈ 18:45, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
- Resizing the thumbnail seems to help. ;-) Hopefully this isn't too big... Maybe we can find a middle ground if so. Diliff (talk) 18:54, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, it looks fine at full size. I think it's actually bad luck that the detail frequency of the photo matches the pixel size here in the thumbnail pretty well so that the sharpening works exceptionally well, i.e. is too strong. — Julian H.✈ 18:45, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
- I know what you mean, I thought the same thing looking at the thumbnail. I can try adjusting it but it looks okay at full size IMO. Diliff (talk) 18:22, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
- Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:32, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
- Support Yes, first looking at the thumbnail, I thought "HDR is overdone". A case where the full size looks better than thumbnail... ;) Yann (talk) 21:07, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful piece. Fma12 (talk) 22:46, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
- Support Perfect, as usual. --Code (talk) 06:08, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Comment Distortions are not problem, of course. But left lower floor looks left-downward slope and right lower floor looks right-downward slope. Other church interior photos of similar composition are not like that... --Laitche (talk) 14:18, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- I noticed this too but to be honest, I don't think it's a problem with the image or the processing. I double-checked the stitching and it's completely rectilinear, with no stitching or control point errors, the lens itself has very minimal distortion, the centre point is the middle of the church and all verticals are vertical. This should mean that horizontals are straight, and if there is a lean, it's because the chairs are not aligned properly with the church. Because this is a very wide angle view, any issues with angles are magnified, particularly with objects close to the camera. There's very little on the floor that you can use as a guide except the chairs, and because these are moveable, it's not possible to assume that they are aligned correctly (from my experience, a lot of church seating is badly aligned!). My only guess is that this is the cause of perception that the floor is leaning. Diliff (talk) 17:26, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- @Diliff: Thanks for the comment, I got what you mean. --Laitche (talk) 17:50, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- I noticed this too but to be honest, I don't think it's a problem with the image or the processing. I double-checked the stitching and it's completely rectilinear, with no stitching or control point errors, the lens itself has very minimal distortion, the centre point is the middle of the church and all verticals are vertical. This should mean that horizontals are straight, and if there is a lean, it's because the chairs are not aligned properly with the church. Because this is a very wide angle view, any issues with angles are magnified, particularly with objects close to the camera. There's very little on the floor that you can use as a guide except the chairs, and because these are moveable, it's not possible to assume that they are aligned correctly (from my experience, a lot of church seating is badly aligned!). My only guess is that this is the cause of perception that the floor is leaning. Diliff (talk) 17:26, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- @Diliff: Just to make sure. If exactly the same photo but with no chairs, I don't feel the floor a slope. That's what you mean? --Laitche (talk) 08:27, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, that's what I mean. I think its only the chairs not being aligned correctly that make it look like it is leaning. I don't think there is a problem with the stitching. My method is very consistent in most of my interiors and none of the others have a problem. The only reason I could think for a problem like a leaning floor is if there is a stitching error but there aren't any in this. Diliff (talk) 13:24, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot. --Laitche (talk) 01:09, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, that's what I mean. I think its only the chairs not being aligned correctly that make it look like it is leaning. I don't think there is a problem with the stitching. My method is very consistent in most of my interiors and none of the others have a problem. The only reason I could think for a problem like a leaning floor is if there is a stitching error but there aren't any in this. Diliff (talk) 13:24, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
- @Diliff: Just to make sure. If exactly the same photo but with no chairs, I don't feel the floor a slope. That's what you mean? --Laitche (talk) 08:27, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
- Support --Tremonist (talk) 16:15, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
- Support I can see a small dictortion in the left side, btw, could be nice and It would have been more interesting not to cut the chairs are in front, taking a photograph from back. --The Photographer (talk) 13:02, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- I did take a photo from the back also, but I actually think the view is not as good. There's less visual interest and the books in the foreground unbalance the composition. Diliff (talk) 14:28, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Alternatively yourself orders chairs, so that appear ordered and not cut. --The Photographer (talk) 16:33, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Not sure what you mean.. you think I should arrange the chairs myself so that they don't look disorganised? :-) Diliff (talk) 17:04, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Alternatively yourself orders chairs, so that appear ordered and not cut. --The Photographer (talk) 16:33, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- I did take a photo from the back also, but I actually think the view is not as good. There's less visual interest and the books in the foreground unbalance the composition. Diliff (talk) 14:28, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Support --Lmbuga (talk) 13:32, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Support -- Pofka (talk) 13:54, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Support Nice colours, nice church, but Diliff what's that on the altar? I add a note. -- RTA 19:13, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- It's a shadow of the candles which are on the left side of it. Diliff (talk) 19:18, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 20:10, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
- Support Albertus teolog (talk) 00:00, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
- Support Poco2 08:48, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors
