Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:LFP - Barcelona vs Mallorca pre-match - Oct 3rd 2010.jpg

File:LFP - Barcelona vs Mallorca pre-match - Oct 3rd 2010.jpg edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Dec 2011 at 13:28:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by Paolo Costa (talk) 13:28, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Paolo Costa (talk) 13:28, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- I was caught by the superb composition and was going to support. But then I opened the picture in full size and realized how the ISO 640 affected its sharpness and detail! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 14:01, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree that the quality is not perfect, but it is beautiful, it makes sense. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:50, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral uh, oh, no, the referee... As German I can't vote unbiased here :-) But seriously, very, very difficult conditions… High ISO: inevitable; wide open aperture: inevitable; short exposure time: inevitable. I don't expect high quality and I see it's the camera's full resolution, but mostly the details are too low, sorry. So I abstain. --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 15:36, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Alves "superb composition"  Richard  [®]  18:34, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm going to feel lonely here, but the composition seems rather fortunate to me (most people shooting from similar place will end up with this). I looks nice for sure... but why is it a little offset to the left ? Quality issues are mitigated by the conditions IMO (but I would have traded more graininess for more details during NR I think). - Benh (talk) 18:48, 6 December 2011 (UTC)-[reply]
Comment I prefer the first version you uploaded without the chroma NR. A slight RHS crop, which makes the distance from the circle to the two sides identical would optimize an already very good composition. Other aspects concerning the quality are mitigatable given the circumstances. Oh, well, I could just have read what benh says above. --Slaunger (talk) 21:10, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Info Ok guys, thanks for the feedback: I uploaded a new version, takin' into account your comments. In answer to Benh: I left some space on the right side because referee (quite prominent in yellow) is in there, balancing the composition to that side. Plus, the referee fell perfectly in the intersection between two lines of thirds, which is usually good (e.g.: placing an eye of a subject in that intersection). But now I centered it anyways. The difference in sharpening is considerable: a bit grainier now, but you were right about NR, looks better imo. If you have some time, feel free to re-check it out.
Support Latest edit. --Slaunger (talk) 06:59, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Alvesgaspar. Compo is good, quality is substandard. พ.s. 12:51, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Overprocessed Cathy Richards (talk) 16:11, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Paolo Costa (talk) 18:11, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]