Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Iglesia del convento de Jesús, Setúbal, Portugal, 2021-09-10, DD 01-03 HDR.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2021 at 22:28:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Portugal
Info Main nave of the church of the Monastery of Jesus, Setúbal, Portugal. The monastery, founded in 1490, is one of the oldest buildings in Manueline style (Portuguese version of Gothic) and served as a monastery of Poor Clare nuns. Note: the high altar of this church is already FP. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 22:28, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 22:28, 7 November 2021 (UTC)- Support Obviously excellent. Cmao20 (talk) 22:57, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
- Support per Cmao20. I like it. -- Radomianin (talk) 23:02, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:38, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
Comment I know this is an old building, but I'm not sure the verticals are vertical. On the RHS window, the verticals lean out towards the top. The tiles on the RHS are hard to see but they lean in towards the top. Those on the LHS are easier to see and their vertical lines lean in towards the top by quite a large degree. You can also use the ornate golden repeated pattern on the tiles, which should be vertical on its centre-of-symmetry. There's also a tile pattern straight ahead, though it is possible that wall has a curve to it. The EXIF suggests a -21 vertical perspective correction and +1.3 perspective rotation has been applied. I wonder if that needs revisiting. -- Colin (talk) 08:48, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
- Colin, I checked the lines again. The image is not tilted and I don't think I needs any horizontal perspective correction, so we are talking here about a vertical perspective correction. The window on the top right is leaning a bit out, I could reduce the perspective correction from 21 to e.g. 18 degrees, but then those golde ornate patterns will need more correction in the other direction, since to get those straight I'd need something like 26 degrees, if I go further the columns at the borders look overcorrected. So, I could go up to 26 but then the window at the top will lean more outwards. I indeed think that the age of the buildings does play a role here (look for example at the tiles behind the altar, they are all but horizontal, specially on the right). Unfortunately I haven't found any usable other images on Commons or on the Internet to compare with and I can surely get everything straight but only with local adjustments what I never do for a "standard" perspective correction. Poco a poco (talk) 18:22, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
- Can you upload-and-revert a version with no vertical perspective correction and no perspective rotation or any other such changes. I could have a play with it to see what can be done. I agree, it is possible the building is just wonky. Perhaps best to ensure the camera is absolutely level to begin with. -- Colin (talk) 08:29, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
- Here you are, Colin Poco a poco (talk) 20:56, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
- I uploaded a version I think is better, and reverted. I didn't apply any rotation or vertical perspective. I just used the guided transform. I applied two vertical guides and one horizontal. You can see the guides on the second image I uploaded. The left guide clearly goes through the centre of the symmetrical pattern, which also happens to be a tile edge. On the right side, there is a symmetrical pattern at the top and bottom, which also follows a tile edge, though that's harder to see. The horizontal is the bottom row of the central tiles. Fixing those tiles also fixed the tiles further away. What was reassuring about this is that if you draw a line down the X's at the very centre of the back wall (from the top of the arch behind the cross down to the lower rectangle of tiles near the ground) it goes through them all perfectly. That tells me that adjusting those two side walls and the horizontal also corrected the rotation at the very centre of the church. The red door on the right is better. The window on the right is likely not true in real life. -- Colin (talk) 18:49, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you for the new version. I didn't have today the chance to compare your version with a version with a tilt + a perspective correction of something like 30, I assume that the different will not be much. In your version, apart from the issue with the window I also think that the colums at both sides ar leaning out, it doesn't look aesthetic to me and I don't think that the colums are tilted for real. I will look and compare the versions tomorrow, latest on Saturday. Thank you! --Poco a poco (talk) 22:13, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
- Colin: I've played around with different settings, also the guided transformation in Lr and would like to keep your version, assuming though that both the window top right and the columns are not straight but slightly leaning out. As the nom is through I see no point in pinging everybody but as the changes are slight IMHO I think that choosing that version would be ok. Poco a poco (talk) 14:07, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
- I'm glad we found a way to improve those sloping walls. Does you camera have a level in the viewfinder? If it were me, I'd ping the others out of courtesy and per COM:OVERWRITE. Your own hesitancy over the change shows to me that it isn't an obvious improvement but balances competing issues that some might object to. Btw, I didn't pay a lot of attention when exporting my version, so it might not have the EXIF you normally set for your own work. -- Colin (talk) 09:43, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- Colin: Sure, I've a level and I usually use it. When I got into the church I was alone (I was really lucky) but right behind me there were more people coming in and doing the temperature test in the moment I took the picture. Long story short, I had to hurry up...--Poco a poco (talk) 13:09, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Cmao20, Radomianin, Famberhorst, IamMM, and Alvesgaspar: @Aristeas, Agnes Monkelbaan, Llez, and Daniel Case: I'm pinging you to let you know that following the discussion during the nom I finally took over Colin's version prioritizing the verticality of the tiles/door versus window on top left and columns. If any of you disagrees with this version I'll revert to the version that was active during the nom. Thank you. --Poco a poco (talk) 13:09, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you for pinging, @Poco a poco: Regarding me, I agree with the new version. Many regards :) -- Radomianin (talk) 14:23, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- I'm glad we found a way to improve those sloping walls. Does you camera have a level in the viewfinder? If it were me, I'd ping the others out of courtesy and per COM:OVERWRITE. Your own hesitancy over the change shows to me that it isn't an obvious improvement but balances competing issues that some might object to. Btw, I didn't pay a lot of attention when exporting my version, so it might not have the EXIF you normally set for your own work. -- Colin (talk) 09:43, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- Colin: I've played around with different settings, also the guided transformation in Lr and would like to keep your version, assuming though that both the window top right and the columns are not straight but slightly leaning out. As the nom is through I see no point in pinging everybody but as the changes are slight IMHO I think that choosing that version would be ok. Poco a poco (talk) 14:07, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you for the new version. I didn't have today the chance to compare your version with a version with a tilt + a perspective correction of something like 30, I assume that the different will not be much. In your version, apart from the issue with the window I also think that the colums at both sides ar leaning out, it doesn't look aesthetic to me and I don't think that the colums are tilted for real. I will look and compare the versions tomorrow, latest on Saturday. Thank you! --Poco a poco (talk) 22:13, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
- I uploaded a version I think is better, and reverted. I didn't apply any rotation or vertical perspective. I just used the guided transform. I applied two vertical guides and one horizontal. You can see the guides on the second image I uploaded. The left guide clearly goes through the centre of the symmetrical pattern, which also happens to be a tile edge. On the right side, there is a symmetrical pattern at the top and bottom, which also follows a tile edge, though that's harder to see. The horizontal is the bottom row of the central tiles. Fixing those tiles also fixed the tiles further away. What was reassuring about this is that if you draw a line down the X's at the very centre of the back wall (from the top of the arch behind the cross down to the lower rectangle of tiles near the ground) it goes through them all perfectly. That tells me that adjusting those two side walls and the horizontal also corrected the rotation at the very centre of the church. The red door on the right is better. The window on the right is likely not true in real life. -- Colin (talk) 18:49, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
- Here you are, Colin Poco a poco (talk) 20:56, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
- Can you upload-and-revert a version with no vertical perspective correction and no perspective rotation or any other such changes. I could have a play with it to see what can be done. I agree, it is possible the building is just wonky. Perhaps best to ensure the camera is absolutely level to begin with. -- Colin (talk) 08:29, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
- Colin, I checked the lines again. The image is not tilted and I don't think I needs any horizontal perspective correction, so we are talking here about a vertical perspective correction. The window on the top right is leaning a bit out, I could reduce the perspective correction from 21 to e.g. 18 degrees, but then those golde ornate patterns will need more correction in the other direction, since to get those straight I'd need something like 26 degrees, if I go further the columns at the borders look overcorrected. So, I could go up to 26 but then the window at the top will lean more outwards. I indeed think that the age of the buildings does play a role here (look for example at the tiles behind the altar, they are all but horizontal, specially on the right). Unfortunately I haven't found any usable other images on Commons or on the Internet to compare with and I can surely get everything straight but only with local adjustments what I never do for a "standard" perspective correction. Poco a poco (talk) 18:22, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
- Support per Cmao20. (If you can come up with an even better perspective correction, that is always welcome, of course ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 10:25, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
- Support --IamMM (talk) 11:26, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
- Support Very good picture of a unique monument. Not easy to have those Solomonic columns in the foreground also on focus, I suppose. Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:32, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:17, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:00, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
- Support Daniel Case (talk) 00:40, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:22, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Portugal
