Wikimedia Commons

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Chester Cathedral Choir, Cheshire, UK - Diliff.jpg

< Commons:Featured picture candidates

File:Chester Cathedral Choir, Cheshire, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jul 2014 at 18:45:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  •   Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff -- Diliff (talk) 18:45, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support -- Diliff (talk) 18:45, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support All your church interior shots are incredible, this I don't need to say (but it's almost free and always good to read I guess). There's so many details to browse at on this picture. I must find little niggles so, I'd just go for the slight leaning to the right which is noticeable on the left part, and the slight overprocessed look (but given your records, I think this is not your signature, and that the church just looks like that). You should nominate here more often also. - Benh (talk) 19:13, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • I was wondering if someone would mention the overprocessed look. As you say, I go to a lot of trouble to actually avoid this, and I think you're right, it might just be that the church looks like that (it's always hard with multiple light sources and different colour tints also). I process all my HDR images quite similarly, and some just look more processed than others! I can't always explain it. :-) As for the lean to the right, I'm not sure... These old buildings are never completely straight to begin with. I agree that many of the lines that you would assume are vertical seem to lean slightly to the right, but I've also found a few that are vertical and one that even leans to the left. Diliff (talk) 19:28, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 19:21, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --Kikos (talk) 19:51, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support Some would say "overprocessed", but well... Yann (talk) 20:25, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Question Would you just share why f/13 and ISO 500 ? I can sort of understand f/13 because you try max DOF, and maybe FF allows you bigger f number before diffraction gets in the way. But ISO 500 ? Is the MkIII this good at handling noise? Is this a kind of sweet spot for dynamic range? - Benh (talk) 21:03, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, the main reason for these settings is that it's a compromise of a few different things. Yes, f/13 for DOF, and because I downsize afterwards, the slight diffraction effects at f/13 are not an issue. ISO 500... Well, I usually use between ISO 320 and ISO 640 for my stitched HDR shots, and the reason is that around ISO 100 takes too damn long. ;-) I shoot usually about 10-15 frames, each with 5 bracketed exposures. With these settings, the longest exposure in the bracket set is usually around 15 seconds, so you can imagine that a 5 bracket set will take about 30 seconds in total to shoot (I often use -6EV, -3EV, 0EV, +3EV and +6EV). If I used ISO 100, the total time for the bracket would be almost 1 minute and would probably bump against the 30s maximum before it could even reach the correct bracketed exposure for +6EV which would be annoying. The 5D Mk iii is good enough at these ISOs. Another thing to realise: the tone mapping uses all exposures to build the image, so if you want to brighten the image, you aren't actually having to dig into the shadow detail like you would with a single exposure, you're using the information from the brighter exposures in the bracket instead, therefore it doesn't get as much noise at a given ISO. Make sense? Anyway, a long story short: ISO 500 is to make the whole panorama take less time to shoot, and to avoid hitting the 30 second limit in the bracket. Diliff (talk) 21:59, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks a lot for these valuable insights. I never realize because I go -2, 0 and +2EV. I probably will reconsider that after seeing your results. - Benh (talk) 22:24, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support May I open that red book please? --Kadellar (talk) 23:32, 16 July 2014 (UTC) PS: thanks for the explanation![reply]
  •   Support -- Amazingly detailed image. I downloaded especially so I could enjoy. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 03:17, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support The books look a tiny bit more colorful/saturated that I'd expect them to look in a place like that, but that's by far not enough to oppose. The ornaments remind me of Peter Jackson's version of the gates of Mordor ;-) --El Grafo (talk) 11:38, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support Wow! --Uoaei1 (talk) 14:36, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --Ivar (talk) 17:18, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support outstanding! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:43, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support Wow3! --Slaunger (talk) 20:48, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      Support +1 Poco2 21:33, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      Support +1 Nikhil (talk) 02:15, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:03, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 22:11, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Chester_Cathedral_Choir,_Cheshire,_UK_-_Diliff.jpg&oldid=129568984"