Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bürstegg 2011-01-30.jpg

File:Bürstegg 2011-01-30.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Feb 2011 at 21:32:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Alex.vonbun - uploaded and nominated by -- Böhringer (talk) 21:32, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Info At the foot of Warther Karhorn 2.416m in Lechquellengebirge is the oldest and highest (1.719m) Walsersiedlung in Vorarlberg. The church, built in 1695 dedicated to St. Martin. Until the late 19th Century, the settlement was inhabited throughout the year. After most of the houses were demolished.
Support Wahaa, reminds me soo well my last winter trip to the Alps... Very nice ! - Benh (talk) 22:05, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I still support, but isn't the pic a tad underexposed ? We're looking at snow after all... should be bit brighter than that. - Benh (talk) 22:20, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment this image needs enhancement.. the color of the snow is grey, not white.. and the overall image in underexposed. Ggia (talk) 22:52, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support The blown sun is a bit annoying, but I guess it's unavoidable in this location. Valuable subject, good panorama. Steven Walling 01:30, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Underexposed. --LeavXC (talk) 06:22, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too dark. W.S. 10:39, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too much filter ? Too dark anyway, the snow looks grey. --Jebulon (talk) 23:59, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too dark. A bit brighter picture would make the trick. I know it is hard to make nice shots in a snow covered countryside, but FP nomination requires perfection. --Aktron (talk) 14:10, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative edit

Support --Böhringer (talk) 08:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC) viel besser, Schnee ist nun weiss und das Licht stimmt nun auch[reply]
Oppose The whitest snow I can find has R:180G:183B:188, and that is definitely not white. Even the sun, which should blow out anyhow, has R:250G:252B:251. So still (much) too dark. W.S. 10:00, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support impressive winter and mountain picture where the snow is light blue (like in reality) --Berthold Werner (talk) 17:35, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well done! --TFCforever (talk) 05:12, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Better, but still too dark IMO...--Jebulon (talk) 22:52, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- MartinD (talk) 10:03, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done Changed the latter nomination to an alternative, since it didn´t have it´s own nomination page, the picture is of the same subject as the first one and without it Bohringer would have 3 active nominations. Additionally, Bohringer´s support vote hints that the latter picture should have been an alternative.--Snaevar (talk) 20:44, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support because the overall composition is good. But the image needs more light.. but this can be enhanced.. it is not a fatal flaw to vote oppose. Ggia (talk) 19:53, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative by User:Ggia edit

Support I propose this version.. you can upload/update if you like your original file.. Look to the levers of you image and you will see a gap between toward the edges (of the histogram). I reconfigured the levels, I applied some mask in the snow.. and I think that this image is enhanced and worth for supporting it. Ggia (talk) 20:08, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support This one. I think Ggia did a good job.--Jebulon (talk) 00:57, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Marmoulak (talk) 09:07, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:27, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Maybe the next edit can remove the noise and the patchiness in the sky? W.S. 13:15, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment it will more kind for the community to try to do it yourself. Why don't you try to edit this image yourself? Ggia 15:02, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment W.S. please do not remove my comment [1].. This image is not mine but I tried to improve it and I proposed as an alternative.. Why don't you try to upload a new version with corrected these technical flows? Here in commons and FPC we are trying also to help other photographers with kind comments.. If you find my comment as a attack please go and give a notice to the community. Thanks.. Ggia (talk) 16:21, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The comment was not removed by W.S (Wetenschatje), but by Walter Sigmund, if I'm not wrong...--Jebulon (talk) 10:43, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

T'as tort. The comment was removed per Walter Sigmund by W.S. - W.S. 15:15, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Sorry. Good lesson to me : Never care about things I'm not concerned. For me, rule hard to enforce, as one can see sometimes :)--Jebulon (talk) 16:24, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is not polite to remove others comments. If you find it "tort", report it to the community.. do not remove it. There is a discussion [2] about that in the commons FPC talk page.I left you a message in your talk page in case you want to participate in this discussion. Ggia (talk) 15:35, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support --alex.vonbun (talk) 12:05, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Iadrian yu (talk) 12:27, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak support~~ Still want to know what that strange yellow spot is, but this is the nicest-looking of the bunch. -- IdLoveOne (talk) 04:40, 11 February 2011 (UTC) Vote is late. W.S. 08:28, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /W.S. 08:29, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]