Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Singapore Marina Bay Dusk 2018-02-27.jpg

File:Singapore Marina Bay Dusk 2018-02-27.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2020 at 16:47:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Singapore
Info all by Benh (talk) 16:47, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Benh (talk) 16:47, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support, although shooting time should be corrected. --Ivar (talk) 16:59, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oops yes, 12:39 is the CET time. I fixed. Thanks. - Benh (talk) 17:01, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 18:06, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:02, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 20:06, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The moving boat is unfortunate (but at least I can see where we had supper to watch the laser light show) Charles (talk) 20:45, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Could be cloned out I guess, but I think I'll save my effort on a full next shooting session when I return there again (wanted to this year, but will be hard now!). Or if other reviewers agree... - Benh (talk) 22:51, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's not like I don't have time Charles, so the boat is gone FYI. - Benh (talk) 16:31, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:18, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:34, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 09:21, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 10:31, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 10:36, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 13:25, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support A shame that Marina Bay Sands got cropped, but still a good photo. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 15:55, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll nominate another panorama soon :-) - Benh (talk) 16:35, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Strong noise and an unfortunate sexual pose distracting --Wilfredor (talk) 16:57, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:16, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @Iifar, The Cosmonaut, Ermell, Podzemnik, Frank Schulenburg, Fischer.H, W.carter, Tournasol7, Kestreltail, and Aristeas: I restitched it (moved viewpoint to the left), and it changes a bit the composition, so you might want to reconsider your votes... Very sorry for the annoyance. - Benh (talk) 18:20, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Really sorry to do this since I almost always support your pics but this one doesn't rise to FP level to me. The buildings on the right are not especially sharp and I think I'd expect more detail for an FP-level night shot. I also can't quite shake the impression that the horizon slopes upwards towards the right. I like it overall but I'm not sure it's as good as other FP cityscapes. Cmao20 (talk) 18:45, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't be sorry :) - Benh (talk) 18:56, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:16, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Beautiful, but could you possibly sharpen the buildings on the other side a bit? I'm a bit doubtful this is sharp enough to meet our current standards of FPs for this kind of view, though based on the voting so far, I'd have to admit it seems to be. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:43, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I can't... and the last change I brought made things worse (since it stretched the buildings). Many things I did wrong with that photo, underexposed, shot jpeg only... so yes it's noisy and unsharp. What you get when in a hurry... I like it though I think it's OK when looked as a whole, but yes, probably not when looked at pixel level, and clearly inferior to the one by Basile (very nice one). - Benh (talk) 23:06, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose If it's 'clearly inferior' and you admit it's short on quality, why the nomination? Charles (talk) 16:12, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Charlesjsharp: It's inferior to a very good pic in terms of quality, but it's acceptable I think. If you downscale to 15 or 10 mpix, it's sharp. And I like the composition. I don't have mitigating reasons. I screwed with my camera setup, and was in a hurry. - Benh (talk) 16:25, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And don't let others opinions influence u. I'm fine with any fair review. They can only help improving. - Benh (talk) 23:07, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're a good guy. So I will mildly Oppose this nomination as not quite IMO an FP (though it looks like it will be one), but I love the larger panorama you linked above in a reply to Kestreltail and will support it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:33, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:50, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:59, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 20:59, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:41, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 18:46, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question @Wilfredor: "Unfortunate sexual pose"? Where? —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 00:54, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

follow the railing and you will find it --Wilfredor (talk) 11:45, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:23, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Singapore