Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Space Needle Panorama
Appearance
- Reason
- Great view of the City. PLUS, It shows people what the view looks like from the famous Space Needle.
- Articles this image appears in
- Seattle, Washington
- Creator
- photographed by S. Bach, stitched by A. Hornung using Hugin
- Support as nominator Rj1020 (talk) 23:54, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
- Weak support There's minor problems with the details here and there (mostly a lack of sharpness, but the bottom right corner has color splotches) but it's outweighed by sheer scope.--HereToHelp (talk to me) 01:33, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- Support Theoretically could be taken on a better day, but considering perfectly clear skies aren't exactly common in Seattle this is probably about as good as we'll get. faithless (speak) 02:26, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- Weak support Image is not exactly in perfect focus and the right hand side is almost completely washed out by the sun. §tepshep • ¡Talk to me! 15:41, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- Comment Maybe the blown-out area on the far right should be cropped out? CillaИ ♦ XC 04:20, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- The image isn't quite 306˚ as is. Something is better than nothing, IMHO.--HereToHelp (talk to me) 21:01, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- Support -- good quality, informative Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 06:25, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose Edit 1 I don't think there is any need for downsampling. It just removes data which could be useful Mahahahaneapneap (talk) 19:50, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- Weak Oppose Edit 1 per Mahahahaneapneap. The original could use some downsampling, but the edit has gone just a bit too far. For example, the stripes of the tower ~13265 px in (which I think would make a good measure of how far to downsample) are not entirely resolved in the edit. If CillianXC still has a copy of the edit before downsample, I'd suggest a width of around 15000px would be better. Thegreenj 03:10, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- Neutral —αἰτίας •discussion• 23:07, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose Picture is terrible quality. crassic![talk] 18:41, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose Unfortunately, there is plenty of texture missing on building surfaces, looks like some strange noise reduction. Sharpness is lacking a bit as well. -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 23:25, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
- 'Oppose per Fcb. Cacophony (talk) 01:48, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
- Weak support ...edit 1: crop a bit too tight. SpencerT♦C 01:27, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
- Support Very vivid and bright picture. — ComputerGuy890100Talk to meWhat I've done to help Wikipedia 00:13, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
No consensus MER-C 12:09, 10 April 2008 (UTC)