Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Grose Valley, NSW, Australia - April 2013.jpg

File:Grose Valley, NSW, Australia - April 2013.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Apr 2014 at 17:38:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by User:Diliff - uploaded by User:Diliff - nominated by User:Diliff -- Diliff (talk) 17:38, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Diliff (talk) 17:38, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:42, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It is large, very large (which is good), but the only feature of the image (the waterfall) fades into insignificance. So unfortunately not enough wow for me. Moros y Cristianos 18:18, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- The feature is the valley itself! It may not have many other notable features, but neither would a photo of the Grand Canyon have any other features other than a big valley. Is the view not enough wow in itself? I've seen plenty of photos with less impressive views pass here without any opposition. Diliff (talk) 22:16, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 18:21, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:22, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great one! The quality is awesome and the view is definitely featurable! The waterfall is "just" a nice addition... --mathias K 06:05, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:04, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:14, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing too special about the image, but it's a nice one. Just doesn't appeal to me. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 13:59, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Good quality, nice waterfall but composition overall is not outstanding to me. It is also a bit blueish, sorry Diliff Poco² 20:46, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- There isn't a blue tint across the image though. The Grose Valley is part of the Blue Mountains which is named for the blue haze caused by the eucalyptus oils that evaporate from the eucalyptus trees, get trapped in the valley and which selectively scatter blue light (See En:Rayleigh scattering or En:Aerial perspective). This isn't even unique to the Blue Mountains though, as most mountain ranges have the same effect, so I'm not sure why you bring that up as an issue? As composition and aesthetics are subjective, I won't attempt to persuade you on that, but I don't see what is wrong with the composition or how a better view would be achieved. Diliff (talk) 22:04, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I must say I echo your earlier sentiments. Wow is indeed subjective but given what has passed as wow here lately I fail to see why there is resistance to this image. Saffron Blaze (talk) 22:50, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:07, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support --JLPC (talk) 07:43, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support --DXR (talk) 19:40, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support (weak): Motive and quality are impressive enough to vote with pro. The light could be better, especially at the farer left part. --Tuxyso (talk) 05:32, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support--ArildV (talk) 15:14, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:51, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Postcard-pretty. Daniel Case (talk) 18:15, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 21:16, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural