Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Theodor-Heuss-Brücke, 1902231957, ako.jpg
File:Theodor-Heuss-Brücke, 1902231957, ako.jpg, not featured
editVoting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Mar 2019 at 07:12:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
- Info View from Kastel (Hesse, Germany) to Mainz (Rhineland-Palatine, Germany) over the river Rhine during blue hour with the illuminated bridge "Theodor-Heuss-Brücke" on the left. Please consider that this is a long exposure through a ND filter and that I did not at all downsample this picture. I wanted to take some bracketed shots for an HDR but the light situation changed too quickly so this is a single exposure. All by me. --Code (talk) 07:12, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support -- Code (talk) 07:12, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:54, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
- Comment very pretty, but how near real life is it? Charles (talk) 10:28, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
- Exactly the kind of comment that kept me away from FPC the last months. Thank you for reminding me on this, Charlesjsharp. My wikibreak was still not long enough to help me get a cooler attitude, sorry. BTW, how near real life is the use of a flash in wildlife photography? --Code (talk) 11:37, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
- Sorry I didn't mean that it wasn't a artistic image, it is. But you did imply it was 'real' by saying blue hour. I never try to hide that I've used flash in wildlife photography. Charles (talk) 13:27, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
- Charles, this is real blue hour photo. If you make a long exposure shot at blue hour, it will make the sky/scene look like midday. To bring it back to what it actually looks like, you use a ND filter. That filter sort of "cancels out" the "brightening" of the image the long-exposure does. I just guess you haven't made enough of such photos to know this technique. --Cart (talk) 13:56, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
- I haven't made any. I don't need to. The process you describe produces a nice image, but does not equal a 'real blue hour photo'. Charles (talk) 14:15, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
- A similar picture, also reviewed by Code last month, appeared completely overprocessed for many of us. This electric blue seems artificial, but the question of real colors is interesting yes -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:38, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
- The only parameter you manipulate with this technique is time since the ND filter is totally neutral (ND stands for neutral density), the color is not affected. Color is controlled by other processes. --Cart (talk) 14:47, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
- Well, using an ND filter is not really complicated. Set your filter, set long-exposure : done. Kind of f/32 ISO 50. But it doesn't mean the saturation has not been pushed too far later in Lightroom. Like this blue snow that was "accurate white balance" in Code's eyes -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:28, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
- Saturation is another discussion, and if you don't agree with it you should 'oppose' on those grounds. Charles was questioning if this was indeed blue hour or just the filter. Re snow photo: Snow can often appear to look blue to the naked eye in the evening/night since it reflects the blue sky and the blue of shadows enhance it, so not that far-fetched but can also be exaggerated in post. --Cart (talk) 15:47, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
- Blue hour sky is not like that in reality (neither blue snow), otherwise it would look familiar and not so strange. This picture is obviously manipulated and slightly oversaturated, see Blue hour on Wikipedia for more accurate examples of how this blue looks like. That one is a kind of concept of "blue hour" working in imagination or in memory, but not a natural blue, faithful in real life. Such kind of electric color you meet it either at noon only, or on your screen after increasing the levels a bit far in post-process. But of course it makes your concept very striking like something incredible where there is only a bridge with yellow lights and some stones in the foreground. I'm not saying this would be a bad picture with natural intensity, but we need to see the truth to judge honestly. For now it looks quite uninteresting to me because this is rather an ordinary scenery where the colors have been multiplied x times. A similar composition with long exposure that was much more successful is this bridge of San Francisco also with stones in the foreground, but natural colors. Day shot, though really exceptional angle and view, that make the difference. Cart says "you should oppose" and perhaps I will do so, but for now it's not necessary because this nomination has already been withdrawn -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:38, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
- I withdraw my nomination Was not my best idea to nominate this. Sorry for that. --Code (talk) 11:37, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Post-withdrawal votes |
---|
|
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Basile Morin (talk) 13:08, 11 March 2019 (UTC)