Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Koenigstein Saxony pic01 2007 04 22.jpg

File:Koenigstein Saxony pic01 2007 04 22.jpg edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2014 at 17:04:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Wimox - uploaded by Wimox - nominated by Wimox -- Wimox (talk) 17:04, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wimox (talk) 17:04, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not convinced this is the best composition for this subject. The mount is almost completely cut off and the river is not well used for effect (creating a leading line). Saffron Blaze (talk) 18:24, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Wimox (talk) 22:06, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative edit

File:Lilienstein and Elbe river from Koenigstein Saxony.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2014 at 22:09:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info Original nomination - Areal view of the Saxon Switzerland in Saxony (Germany). The perspectiv gives a better view of the landscape than the previous nominated photography. - created by Wimox - uploaded by Wimox - nominated by Wimox -- Wimox (talk) 22:09, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wimox (talk) 22:09, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The view has some wow, but not enough sharpness / significant blur at the sides; I'm sorry, not enough for an FP to me --A.Savin 23:06, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The lighting is not very interesting as it was taken too close to noon. Also blur on left side as mentioned by A.Savin. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:23, 9 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose *Very* blur, and slightly underexposed. What a pity as the picture was "wow". --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 02:30, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose When I linked to this image in the oprevious nomination it was not a suggestion to nominate this version. Sorry if I misguided you in that regard. I was just highlighting how the previous image had lost much of the potential for visual appeal by the compositional choice. This is a better compositional choice, but it is let down by the technical aspects. Saffron Blaze (talk) 15:04, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 07:55, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]