Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Melbourne Afternoon Yarra River Panorama

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Melbourne Afternoon Yarra River Panorama

Melbourne's Yarra River is a popular recreational area, with facilities for rowing, cycling, jogging/walking and picnicing along the banks
Melbourne's Yarra River is a popular recreational area, with facilities for rowing, cycling, jogging/walking and picnicing along the banks

This is a similar nomination to a failed one I have submitted many months ago, so I don't have high expectations of it. However, I think I have improved the composition slightly with this panoramic view, showing both the city skyline and the parkland and cycling/walking paths that run along the banks. The left-side foreground has been enhanced to show detail as it was originally quite shadowy and dark, however, I feel that I have preserved the detail reasonably tastefully. It looks a little oversaturated on my monitor at work, which surprises me, but if that is a problem, obviously it can be toned down. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 09:27, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Nominate and support. - Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 09:27, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Conditional Support I really feel like the image would be better had the camera been rotated maybe 15 degrees to the right. The trees on the left are much darker than the opposite bank and the cars behind them more distracting and fuzzy. It still does a very effective, high quality job of displaying the river and the surrounding area (having the city as the background is nice). My condition for full fledged support is cropping along the left side to get rid of the straight section of path (essentially, crop just to the left of the female jogger down the path). Staxringold 14:47, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Another condition On looking over it again, this image definetly needs a more detailed encyclopedic use before it can be considered a featured picture. Being thrown into the top of the Melbourne article because it is a river in Melbourne does not make it contribute signifigantly. 14:48, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
    • To say it is thrown into the top of the article is a bit harsh. This view of the city skyline is somewhat iconic and I felt it was a good image to illustrate/contrast both the urban city skyline and the recreation nearby. But fair enough. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 17:00, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I actually think the first one, albeit somewhat ordinary, was better. It's a nice view of the city. But the park on the left and the expanse of water along the bottom don't add anything except a dark shadowy area which crowds out the brighter upper-right corner. At least, I would crop out everything below (along the bottom) and to the left (along the side) of the female jogger. bcasterline t 15:54, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Sorry, I just don't see that there's anything especially extraordinary about this shot. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 18:12, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose I agree with your original misgivings, Diliff. Personally, I don't fancy the muddy colors. (This is not one of your best. In addition to the normal FPC criteria you're competing with yourself, here - not that it affected my vote... ;-) --Janke | Talk 06:11, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. I don't know if you still have the material, but I'd like to see this picture cropped just below and to the left of the pedestrian in the foreground and extended to the right (but thats just curiosity). --Dschwen 06:14, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose Lack of contrast i.e too murky, and the focus is not good - Adrian Pingstone 08:04, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
    • The focus is just fine. The only part of the image out of focus is the absolute foreground near the water's edge. Thats like opposing the bear nomination because the background is blurred! :) This is a stitch of four 12 megapixel images that were focused on infinity, you cannot tell me that it is not in focus. Consider the size of the image, not just the absolute sharpness. That said, I can appreciate your other reasons for opposition.
    • Apologies, I hadn't opened up the big image. The focus is indeed OK - Adrian Pingstone 09:10, 21 April 2006 (UTC) Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 09:07, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment speaking as a Melburnian, I love seeing Melbourne photos here :) It would probably be better with a bit more sun (a big ask in winter, I know :)), and it might be nicer panned a lot to the right, focusing on the right bank (trees are prettier than the bike path), with the CBD thus towards the left of centre. I would also be inclined to give more weight to the sky than to the water (even though the Yarra is looking much prettier than normal) ;) It's a nice photo, but damn we're picky here. :) Stevage 09:08, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
    Incidentally, is there an article on the Yarra Trail? It would go well there. (apparently not..yet) Stevage 09:10, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose doesn't look particularly special to me. chowells 15:56, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose Sorry Diliff, its just sorta dull. Colors arent very bright. Maybe try morning or noon time?-Ravedave 03:21, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose Agree with above, the LHS doesn't really work. I'd actually rather see the sky scrapers in the far left and more of the road that is on the RHS --Fir0002 www 11:57, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Fir. I don't like the left part in shadow. enochlau (talk) 14:22, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose I don't like the colors. The darker left part dominates the picture, which is rather distracting. Mikeo 16:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose I like this photo, but i dont think it captures what the Yarra can really be like, and from what i have seen, it can be magnificent. It is a nice image though, --Ali K 03:50, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Not promoted Raven4x4x 06:57, 28 April 2006 (UTC)