Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Long Island City New York May 2015 panorama 3.jpg

File:Long Island City New York May 2015 panorama 3.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jun 2015 at 07:09:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Panoramas
Info Manhattanhenge was a bust yesterday; look at all these poor photographers. But at least I got this little gem out of it.
Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:09, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:09, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support impressive and with big wow -- Christian Ferrer 09:39, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Christian. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 10:21, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice. The trees look a little funny, but it's not like you can put a wind cover over the scene. :) — Julian H.^✈ 12:12, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support A New York City skyline we don't usually think of. Very well done. Daniel Case (talk) 18:52, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow. -- Pofka (talk) 20:27, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Very well done. Everything in this picture of Queens is pretty clear, unlike the pictures that I take of Queens. :-) Epic Genius (talk) 01:19, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Nice shot, I think it has just a little too much perspective correction, or am I mistaken? --Tomascastelazo (talk) 02:19, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Could you annotate which verticals are not straight? --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:15, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The problem is that they are too straight, and being striaght means that instead of leaning backwards, the buildings lean forward, giving an unnatural look for the perception of distance is distorted. From the point of view of the camera, the bottom part of the building is closer than the top part of the building. A natural look would make the top slightly less narrow than the bottom, that is, the buidings should have converging lines, not parallel lines. In essence, with perspective correction the top part of the building is stretched sideways to give the appearance of straight, hence the leaning forward perception. There are several ways to take the picture with an acceptable perspective control before resorting to artificial digital means. One thing is to mitigate excesive converging due to lens used and other considerations and it is another to exagerate the correction. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 18:44, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Böhringer (talk) 05:45, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:46, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:45, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support The outermost right vertical of the right house is slightly bended inwards, Caused either by using a wide-angle objective or by stitching the panorama. I know this problem, I have it sometimes the same in some of my panoramas. Should be fixable. --Llez (talk) 10:20, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, both Photoshop and ACR only allow you to set the vertical perspective correction in integer increments, and the next increment over pushes it too far in the opposite direction. IMO it's not too noticeable, and the creators of Photoshop seem to think that being a half-point off on their vertical distortion scale is not a big deal. Given the choice, I'd rather buildings lean in than out. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:49, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support The trees look like a bit ghost but nice view :) --Laitche (talk) 15:31, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice. Great light. A pity that it isn't a little sharper. --Code (talk) 16:20, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I had the choice of my 18-55 and 35 prime. Unfortunately the height of the building could not fit entirely in the wide dimension of the 35, so I had to take a 3 x 2 horizontal pano, which I spent several hours trying to stitch and gave up in frustration. I think due to the wide view and distortion, my frames were actually missing pieces of sky in the top, so both Photoshop and Hugin got thrown off pretty badly. I ended up going with Plan B, which I took because I knew multirow panoramas would be a pain in the ass. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:13, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Halavar (talk) 16:31, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support Top Poc o² 18:17, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 19:10, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 21:58, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not so bad ... ^_^ (indeed quite impressive picture) --PierreSelim (talk) 06:28, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tremonist (talk) 13:19, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support It could breathe little bit more on far right side, but still nice image. --Mile (talk) 14:04, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support Was there a camera giveaway or what? Nice "Making of"! --Kadellar (talk) 22:20, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:25, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- --WPPilot (talk) 20:09, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Voting has ended, please don't add any new votes. — Julian H.^✈ 09:34, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:25, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas