Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Cupola of Basilica San Vitale (Ravenna).JPG

File:Cupola of Basilica San Vitale (Ravenna).JPG edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 May 2015 at 20:00:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
Info Cupola of Basilica San Vitale in Ravenna. Built in year 547 A.D. UNESCO World heritage site.
Support -- Mile (talk) 20:00, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support is a war of...domes --LivioAndronico talk 20:19, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support More war of domes! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 00:45, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The dome has wow potential and I would support it if the execution would have been better. Again we have here a tilt problem, in this case it is tilted in cw direction. If corrected the column in the top right would be located in the corner, and the same with the other three. That is disturbing, furthermore, the main problem I see here is the quality. The denoising is so strong that I cannot find detail in some areas, it rather looks like a painting (also where it isn't like the arches). Poc o² 08:08, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Poco² --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:10, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Info I am not sure about tilting, woman is sitting on vertical of circle. Poc could you please make note on photo about that areas you mentioned (so i can show you original). Some of them lack fresco in original. Level of detail is high enough, nothing is lost. Quality is good enough. --Mile (talk) 10:01, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure what you take as reference (which woman?) but the tilt is obvious and symmetry for this kind of picture is required, all arches are tilted in ccw direction resulting in an unbalanced picture. The lack of quality is IMHO obvious overall, as a guide you can have a look into these 2 dome pictures [1] (HDR with camera on the floor), [2] (HDR handheld) Poc o² 10:08, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The woman which is sitting on the edge of the circle. I again would like you to put "note" windows which part is lacking details or is corrupted by your opinion (so we cab solve that in a moment). I dont do HDR, i dont like them since they never look real. Photos you show me are good, yet completely other stuff. Simple lines, no frescos or some serious art where you can bear the sigth. Hence some good details neither. I dont see any higer IQ on them despite the fact you have used Full Frame camera of higher megapixle number (your camera with lens is probably some 10 times more expencive than mine). --Mile (talk) 10:33, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Support When I was in Ravenna not allowed me to take pictures there --Σπάρτακος (talk) 12:04, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the quality isn't OK for me, this image is posterized = unfortunately overprocessed. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:23, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too huge quality issues. At first (when I saw small thumbnail) I was surprised why so many people are opposing this outstanding picture. It became more than clear for me when I enlarged it. Pity. The lighting and the colors are stunning here. -- Pofka (talk) 18:11, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral It's too dark for me. --Tremonist (talk) 13:33, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Critics had it. --Mile (talk) 15:27, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]