Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Skeppsbron december 2010.JPG

File:Skeppsbron december 2010.JPG, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2011 at 17:29:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded, and nominated by -- ArildV (talk) 17:29, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ArildV (talk) 17:29, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose sorry, but f/22 ?? To unsharp with "ghosts" and oversaturated. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 20:17, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Not oversatured IMO, natural colours direct from the camera. Why F/22, must have been a mistake but I do not think it affects the picture that much. Unsharp, maybe but there was snow in the air.--ArildV (talk) 20:38, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please read the article: Diffraction blur. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:21, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- I'm not sure it was possible to get a good picture under these difficult conditions. But putting the camera in autoexposure is not a good choice. Better to take several shots with different exposure solutions (bracketing) and pray for someone to get right! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:41, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - too soft even at 1/2 full resolution. --Claritas (talk) 21:03, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support The mood of the place is very well captured in a way unusual to featured pictures here. It's not oversaturated IMO. / Achird (talk) 21:56, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't think it's so unusual a mood, (I have myself contributed a few dusk shots, as I like the genre pretty much) albeit it's true that the Xmas tree gives a nice touch to the picture. But the quality is way insufficient and I don't think it was because of the difficult conditions but rather because the camera settings were not optimal. Framing is a bit tight as well. - Benh (talk) 22:21, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The crop is very tight at the top and the bottom. Noise redutcion was pushed too far it seems. I like the mood. --Paolo Costa (talk) 04:31, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per alchemist. If you insisted on the five second exposure time to get motion blur I would have chosen the lowest possible ISO (100 or lower) and have opened the aperture to circumvent the diffraction limit. View is nice though. --Slaunger (talk) 20:25, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Mild Oppose - great mood, good color, but I have to agree with some of the comments above, particularly about the crop. Jonathunder (talk) 00:18, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice peacefull atmosphere. --Karelj (talk) 14:28, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Claritas (talk) 10:26, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]