I think that this is an image that demonstrates well both the National Congress and the general look of Brasília. I think it is high quality and distinctive. It is big enough and has a free licence. I found it whilst browsing, and thought it looked excellent, so I have nominated it. It is by xenïa antunes, and appears on Brasília, National Congress of Brazil, Politics of Brazil etc. (sorry about the page name - it is a typo).
- Nominate and support. - Estrellador* 11:22, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Oppose. Far too much road in the foreground and sky on the right, the subject takes up less than a third of the image (more like a sixth), if it was cropped I might change my vote. -- Pharaoh Hound 12:53, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- Weak support edit 2. -- Pharaoh Hound 11:50, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- Agree, experimenting in the browser suggests that it's much more pleasing if you crop to just allow enough of the road to be able to understand the geography of the windows to the right of shot.
Stevage
15:26, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- Just one problem with a crop: the product will probably end up too small unless a higher res version of the original is available. ---
Pharaoh Hound
19:10, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- Well, that means the image is too small then. We want 1000xN pixels of useful content, not just 1000xN pixels of whatever :) Stevage 08:30, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
- Just one problem with a crop: the product will probably end up too small unless a higher res version of the original is available. ---
Pharaoh Hound
19:10, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose - I have seen better pictures of this subject that provide a better view and angle highlighting the modern architecture. This picture does not demonstrate that well. -- P199 16:32, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose - Only about 1/4 of the picture is actually focusing on the building. There's way too much open space to the right and way too much road in front. bob rulz 01:42, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
- Anyone know if the long flat building to the right is part of the same building? If so, it should be in the photo (as it is).
Stevage
08:30, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, it is the actual parliament building itself. It is horribly represented here in all edits (still oppose). -- P199 16:57, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Anyone know if the long flat building to the right is part of the same building? If so, it should be in the photo (as it is).
Stevage
08:30, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. This is a much more interesting and encyclopaedic image, as well as being quite a cheeky and clever image. Surely it is a better photo for the article? Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 09:13, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Oppose for reason above, too much road.DVD+ R/W 00:43, 17 June 2006 (UTC) I have made two cropped edits for your approval and consideration. DVD+ R/W 00:57, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- I like (Support) the second one. I understand all your points about there being too much road, but the article on Brasília seemed to imply that roads were very important in that city. Oh well. Thanks for the edits. (BTW, Edit two is wll over 1000px.) :-) Estrellador* 07:20, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- oppose too much of nothing say1988 17:57, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose per Diliff. The building should be photographed from the lawn, not from the road. — Vildricianus 14:43, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose per other reason + it seems to me like when zoomed in its quite blurry-- Childzy ( Talk| Contribs) 19:54, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Not promoted -- Fir0002 00:47, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
I think that this is an image that demonstrates well both the National Congress and the general look of Brasília. I think it is high quality and distinctive. It is big enough and has a free licence. I found it whilst browsing, and thought it looked excellent, so I have nominated it. It is by xenïa antunes, and appears on Brasília, National Congress of Brazil, Politics of Brazil etc. (sorry about the page name - it is a typo).
- Nominate and support. - Estrellador* 11:22, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Oppose. Far too much road in the foreground and sky on the right, the subject takes up less than a third of the image (more like a sixth), if it was cropped I might change my vote. -- Pharaoh Hound 12:53, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- Weak support edit 2. -- Pharaoh Hound 11:50, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- Agree, experimenting in the browser suggests that it's much more pleasing if you crop to just allow enough of the road to be able to understand the geography of the windows to the right of shot.
Stevage
15:26, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- Just one problem with a crop: the product will probably end up too small unless a higher res version of the original is available. ---
Pharaoh Hound
19:10, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- Well, that means the image is too small then. We want 1000xN pixels of useful content, not just 1000xN pixels of whatever :) Stevage 08:30, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
- Just one problem with a crop: the product will probably end up too small unless a higher res version of the original is available. ---
Pharaoh Hound
19:10, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose - I have seen better pictures of this subject that provide a better view and angle highlighting the modern architecture. This picture does not demonstrate that well. -- P199 16:32, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose - Only about 1/4 of the picture is actually focusing on the building. There's way too much open space to the right and way too much road in front. bob rulz 01:42, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
- Anyone know if the long flat building to the right is part of the same building? If so, it should be in the photo (as it is).
Stevage
08:30, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, it is the actual parliament building itself. It is horribly represented here in all edits (still oppose). -- P199 16:57, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Anyone know if the long flat building to the right is part of the same building? If so, it should be in the photo (as it is).
Stevage
08:30, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. This is a much more interesting and encyclopaedic image, as well as being quite a cheeky and clever image. Surely it is a better photo for the article? Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 09:13, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Oppose for reason above, too much road.DVD+ R/W 00:43, 17 June 2006 (UTC) I have made two cropped edits for your approval and consideration. DVD+ R/W 00:57, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- I like (Support) the second one. I understand all your points about there being too much road, but the article on Brasília seemed to imply that roads were very important in that city. Oh well. Thanks for the edits. (BTW, Edit two is wll over 1000px.) :-) Estrellador* 07:20, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- oppose too much of nothing say1988 17:57, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose per Diliff. The building should be photographed from the lawn, not from the road. — Vildricianus 14:43, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose per other reason + it seems to me like when zoomed in its quite blurry-- Childzy ( Talk| Contribs) 19:54, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Not promoted -- Fir0002 00:47, 27 June 2006 (UTC)