Comment - This is one of the most beatifull pictures nominated as FPC in the last times. Still, strict photographic quality is not very good: the picture is blurry and lacks detail, and the colouring doesn't look natural. Before I vote I would like to know if the image was post-processed and how. Alvesgaspar08:20, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I corrected the tilt. Otherwise there was no post-processing at all. Would you recommend changing anything with the colors? The picture was taken in the very late afternoon when the light is dim but very warm.--Christoph Michels08:49, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is pretty because of the colors, but there are no fine details. The hillside grass is just color mush. Maybe this is blur, not enough DoF, or a combination of both. It's possible that the focus is set too far into infinity. There is no mitigating reason why a smaller aperture couldn't have been used. -- Ram-Man12:17, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I love the colours and the atmosphere. But I agree with Ram-Man about the aperture issue. Also i dont like the horizon centered in the middle of the picture. That divides the picture in two parts. --Simonizer12:49, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the mood. In my opinion the so called color mush is resulted in the dim light and the little color contrast. --LC-de12:50, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
An image in twilight like this should have a relatively sharp foreground, like this image taken at the same time as this sunset. Taking it in dim light is no excuse for this much unsharpness. Approximately 50% of the image is blurred. At 1/800 and f/5.6, there was no reason this image couldn't have been taken at 1/400 and f/11. -- Ram-Man13:40, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The sky has some good, subtle colours, but the large expanse of rather boring and unfocussed green on the left detracts from the composition. --MichaelMaggs09:56, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]