Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Egeskov Slot spejling

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Egeskov Castle

Reason

Good picture with enc value which shows us the architecture of the castle very well.

Articles this image appears in

Egeskov Castle

Creator

Malene Thyssen

Nominator

Arad

• Support — Arad 17:34, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
• Weak support - lovely composition, but I wonder if we could clean up the perspective distortion a bit. The walls seem to bulge outwards. Stevage 23:24, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support - The picture itself is beautifully taken at a good angle. The picture is high-resolution. The fact that the walls seem to bulge outwards give the picture a slight 3D effect, which is something that I consider very pleasing to the eye. Maybe a small caption could be added. Wwicki 00:13, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
• Comment Some people and other stuff have been cloned out in this version, the original is at Image:Egeskov Slot spejling.jpg. --KFP (talk | contribs) 01:02, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
• Neutral Focus is a little soft, there is to much of the tree/shrub on the right. bad focus on the left background isn't great but since it isn't the subject I cant complain that much. Other than that a good picture. -Fcb981 02:00, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - This is the reason why we don't have enough FP. We're too picky and have a lot of time on our hand. --Arad
  • Um, SHOULDN'T we be picky. We ARE trying to select the very finest pictures after all. I'd rather have 700 very good featured pictures than 1200 OK ones. -Fcb981 04:45, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Of course we should be picky. But a featured picture isn't just about hw it looks. What is also important is if it actually adds to the article. Is it a significant addition? Why do you think this picture would label as "ok"? It gives an excellent overview of the architecture and is high-resolution. I personally don't think that the walls bulge outwards however, I don't think regular users who aren't experts or picky, will be when it comes to the minor,minor glitches of a high-resolution (I don't think this picture has glitches). Wwicki 13:35, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support I checked the verticals and can't find any bulging walls that aren't the result of the architecture (note that circumference increases upwards, especially in the towers). The only thing I can't identify is an odd yellow dot to the right of the tower. Rest is well done and enc. I think the foliage in the foreground adds context. ~ trialsanderrors 05:26, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment I think the yellow dot is a flag or something similar.--Arad 05:34, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
    • It might be a leaf from the tree in the foreground since it's not mirrored in the lake. Since the picture has already been photoshopped I'd support removing it. ~ trialsanderrors 17:58, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
      • It does look like a leaf. I can't think of any possible yellow flag that could be associated with (the Counts of) Egeskov, so I wouldn't mind seeing it gone. Support btw. Valentinian ^{T / C} 00:26, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
  • It's obviously a UFO. See the focus --froth^T 05:53, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
    • Oh, that's from the spire, right? I was looking at the dot to the right of the right tower, roughly at the level of the topmost window under the roof. The UFO on top of the spire looks like a weathervane. ~ trialsanderrors 06:29, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
      • The thing on the spire is indeed a brass weathervane. Valentinian ^{T / C} 10:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - Nice architecture; I'd like to do this as a jigsaw. Oh, and that's definitely just a leaf there. Mrug²
• Support per nom and others. This is a lovely pic, and gives a lot of information about the structure of the castle which you wouldn't get from a straight-on entrance view. Mak (talk) 17:29, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support. Sharp, good color, pleasing composition, high enc. --Janke | Talk 09:51, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support very nicely done. I very much like the scene, the tree on the right is only a little prob. But all in all it is a very nice image, meets FP requirements. ~ Arjun 14:22, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support excellent picture. Zarxos 16:14, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support The castle appears under perfect conditions and makes for an amazing photo. The only way it could improve would be to crop a bit of the water out to add balance. No doubt FP worthy. - Nilington 08:15, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support Good composition, technically great. ^HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 15:38, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support Great picture and meets all the criteria required for a Featured Picture. Christophenstein 20:17, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:58, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support, I want to live in this picture. gren グレン 00:28, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose has anyone opened up the original and this version in two different tabs and jumped back and forth to compare? The person in the pink shirt is still faintly visible in the bushes. The cloning of the steps on the left side of the building has some bad repeating patterns, and the bench has been completely removed with some fictional object. Also, the composition is a little unbalanced with the foreground foliage on the right side.-Andrew c 03:18, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  • No part of the subject itself has been modified, people were removed, a branch and the people on the bench was replaced by a bench. I think the image page should make these edits very clear, but I don't think it damages the encyclopedic value. ^HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 03:22, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
    • I added {{RetouchedPicture}} on the commons page. --Dschwen(A) 10:20, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
• Support Not bad. By the way, that dot's a UFO. ;-) · AO ^Talk 00:50, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Promoted Image:Egeskov Slot spejling Edit 2.jpg Basar 04:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC)