Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/paris arc

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Paris from the Arc de Triomphe

View of the city of Paris taken from the top of Arc de Triomphe. We can see the Champs-Elysées, the dark Montparnasse tower near the center and the Eiffel tower.

• Nominate and support. - Jplavoie 23:34, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
• support: Very nice image, showing some views that so many want to see, but don't have the opportunity. --Emustonen 21:38, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: I find these stitched, panaramic photos to be disorienting when applied to citiscapes, especially in the way the streets line up like 'W's'. The photo has great detail and a lot to recommend (though the sky could be prettier), but I can't support because of the warped perspective. SteveHopson 23:55, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
• Weak support. Some minor quality issues at maximum resolution, and it's of dubious value located in its two current articles (since it illustrates neither the Eiffel Tower nor the Arc de Triomphe particularly well). Otherwise, it's quite detailed and as interesting as many other panoramas. I agree with SteveHopson that panoramic photos are disorienting, but I don't think this shot is especially so. bcasterline t 00:54, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
• Comments: 1)There is an important optical distortion along the second street from the left, as if there was a massive source of heat. 2)The picture does not illustrate the Arc de Triomphe at all, since it is taken from it. The Eiffel Tower is only a few pixels out of a whole panorama. IMHO, this picture should be removed from the two articles and inserted in Paris. After all that's what it is supposed to illustrate isn't it? Glaurung 06:05, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I just realized that this picture was added to the Paris article, but removed by editors thinking the article had enough pictures already -Glaurung 06:11, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

• I believe that the optical distortion you see is a stitching fault. Panorama stitching software can sometimes do this, either by not aligning the images correctly, or simply because the frame itself was out of focus or motion blurred due to camera shake. Its hard to tell what has happened in this case. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 06:54, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
• Weak opposefor the following (fixable) reasons: The horizon is dipping slightly in the middle. Colors are somewhat murky. Also, something needs to be done about the caption - a statement about this being a 360° (?) panorama would help - otherwise someone may believe all the radial roads in Paris are parallell... ;-) --Janke | Talk 06:07, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

  Comment This is not a 360° panorama, it is just roughtly 180°. So, for instance, the high rises of La Defense and the Grande Arche cannot be seen - as well as 6 more streets. Mikeo 06:43, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

• Support If anything, this should go in the Paris article..? I saw a few stitching flaws (actually just one where two cars overlap) but I'm very impressed anyway. drumguy8800 - speak 02:51, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. I like it, but I don't think it is good enough to be representative of anything. It lacks focus. As mentioned previously, it isn't in the Paris article, but I don't think it validly depicts either the Arc de Triomphe or Eiffel Tower. It lacks relevency to the articles. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 09:00, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose I think that the way the streets line up, make it a bit less encyclopedic. Someone who was unfamilar with panoramics might think the actaully look like that. --Lewk_of_Serthic _contrib ^talk 20:23, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose, its really boring BWF89 04:25, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
• Support Great image. I really like the way the streets look - really interesting angle. Also nice to see the Eiffel Tower in a less cliched idylic setting. --Fir0002 www 10:04, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. It's just a bunch of buildings. It doesn't show the layout of Paris because the layout is destroyed by the perspective, and the view isn't particularly spectacular. I see the two towers poking out in the distance, but the rest is just generic and doesn't tell me anything. Night Gyr 08:25, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Not promoted --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 00:55, 3 May 2006 (UTC)