Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Côte d'Albâtre - Roc Vaudieu.jpg

File:Côte d'Albâtre - Roc Vaudieu.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2020 at 16:34:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France#Normandy
Info Alabaster coast at Roc Vaudieu, Normandy, France. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 16:34, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Milseburg (talk) 16:34, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Not enough sky for me. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:43, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sky is empty. It´s a view into the deep and the distance. --Milseburg (talk) 16:48, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ Sorry not enough sky for me. IMO rule of thirds is not always necessary, but this is just nice to look to. --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:10, 21 April 2020 (UTC) After extra sky I change to Neutral[reply]
@Michielverbeek: I actually don't like to follow rule of thirds with an empty sky or empty water; I'd go with 1/4 or 1/5 for sky, and possibly even less for water. But I agree with the general sentiment that this picture has too little sky. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:03, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Opposeper Michielverbeek. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:25, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Pretty and well-composed photo but IMO the light is a bit too dull for FP, sorry Milseburg. It's a solid QI though. Cmao20 (talk) 13:36, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info @Charlesjsharp, Michielverbeek, King of Hearts, and Fischer.H: I spent more sky. --Milseburg (talk) 14:03, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I'm not sure an artificially-added sky is appropriate here. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:02, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Charlesjsharp: You´re right. That hasn't been the best solution. Now I added a natural sky by stitching in total 4 frames. --Milseburg (talk) 16:52, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support - The additional sky made the photo breathe more and added at least one more shore bird. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:57, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Dull light -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:14, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support It’s a pity that the light is a bit boring, sorry, but else it is good, the details in the foreground are nice. --Aristeas (talk) 09:13, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:33, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:18, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Sorry, I agree with Aristeas that the light does not make this stand out enough for FP for me. Otherwise very good quality. --Domob (talk) 16:35, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 21:10, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]