Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Paraskevi of Iconium church in Kwiatoń (Квятонь).jpg

File:Paraskevi of Iconium church in Kwiatoń (Квятонь).jpg edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jul 2022 at 11:56:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Poland
Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 11:56, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pudelek (talk) 11:56, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Not sharp at pixel level, but great otherwise. — Urban Versis 32^KB ⚡ ^{(talk | contribs)} 16:52, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose Too unsharp for a 6 MP image in 2022. Otherwise I like it, though I would crop away some distractions on the left. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:26, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others – nice composition and light indeed, but the quality is just not there. Consider a slight crop as suggested to get rid of the power pole to the left and the tree on the right. --Kreuz schnabel 19:43, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per King of Hearts & Urban Versis 32. The resolution is too low. -- Wolf im Wald 05:59, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral To appreciate also the good things: The perspective is a good choice, the light and shadows (at least on the church) are nice, the colours are natural and attractive. In this regard this is probably the best of our photographs of the church, and IMHO it has even some ‘wow’ effect – the photo immediately makes me want to visit that church (this is why I don’t oppose). The problem is in the detail, as already stated. One could argue whether 6,8 megapixels are still OK for this kind of photograph in 2022 or not, but even when we allow that resolution there is still the problem that at pixel level the image looks like a slightly unsharp photo which has been oversharpened in post-processing – fine details and microcontrast are missing, the coarse details are a bit oversharpened. (It looks like the lens is not able to outresolve the sensor of the D3100, which is a bit astonishing given that the sensor has only 14.2 megapixels. Or the JPEG engine of the camera has already sharpened the image in a rather coarse way and post-processing has amplified that effect. So maybe optimizing the post-processing with a more fine-tuned sharpening could at least improve the situation.) --Aristeas (talk) 09:35, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination--Pudelek (talk) 15:05, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]