Comment - Lovely view and I wish that when I was there I had good light, a good camera, skill, and more time. I do recall though that Wineglass Bay is best viewed, not from here but from where you can see the shape of the bay -
Peripitus(Talk) 12:39, 16 December 2009 (UTC)reply
File:Freycinet Wineglass Bay And Promise Bay.jpg from
the article, also taken from Mt Amos, seems to show more what is being suggested, though I'm not sure that quite nails it perfectly (I think yours shows that it is a bay better than the other one). Also, is there something very funny going on with your metadata? 1/80 at ISO 200 in the early afternoon in summer? The Hazards one also seems odd. --
jjron (
talk) 06:29, 17 December 2009 (UTC)reply
A polariser was used, which probably knocked about 2 stops off. Take that into account and you are about a stop off what
Sunny 16 rule would suggest. The hazards photo was taken after the sun had gone down (you get warm directional light that is still fairly soft).
Noodle snacks (
talk) 06:54, 17 December 2009 (UTC)reply
Yeah, fair enough, only thought later you must have whacked a filter or two on which could have made the settings realistic. And also only checked later what time the Hazards one was taken, still it says a 30sec exposure, which did seem high even for that time. --
jjron (
talk) 23:58, 17 December 2009 (UTC)reply
Support: good picture with good EV of several subjects. I'd be grateful if you added the date and a geotag to the Commons description.
NotFromUtrecht (
talk) 08:05, 17 December 2009 (UTC)reply
Thanks. (By the way: I converted your date to
ISO 8601 format, which can be understood by the wiki software, since 08/12/09 has different meanings in British/US English.)
NotFromUtrecht (
talk) 10:21, 17 December 2009 (UTC)reply
Support Excellent picture and I cannot see any technical issues myself... It's pictures like this that make me question my city-living lifestyle in favour of running away to somewhere like this... Stunning scenery...
Gazhiley (
talk) 14:16, 17 December 2009 (UTC)reply
Oppose I'm willing to change to support the nom if the photographer presents an alternative that cuts out the 1/4 of the height of the original image. I think the hill on the bottom part is distracting and blocking the blue coastline.--
Caspian blue 11:04, 20 December 2009 (UTC)reply
Just to be clear, you would like some of the bottom cropped out?
Noodle snacks (
talk) 13:05, 20 December 2009 (UTC)reply
Comment - Lovely view and I wish that when I was there I had good light, a good camera, skill, and more time. I do recall though that Wineglass Bay is best viewed, not from here but from where you can see the shape of the bay -
Peripitus(Talk) 12:39, 16 December 2009 (UTC)reply
File:Freycinet Wineglass Bay And Promise Bay.jpg from
the article, also taken from Mt Amos, seems to show more what is being suggested, though I'm not sure that quite nails it perfectly (I think yours shows that it is a bay better than the other one). Also, is there something very funny going on with your metadata? 1/80 at ISO 200 in the early afternoon in summer? The Hazards one also seems odd. --
jjron (
talk) 06:29, 17 December 2009 (UTC)reply
A polariser was used, which probably knocked about 2 stops off. Take that into account and you are about a stop off what
Sunny 16 rule would suggest. The hazards photo was taken after the sun had gone down (you get warm directional light that is still fairly soft).
Noodle snacks (
talk) 06:54, 17 December 2009 (UTC)reply
Yeah, fair enough, only thought later you must have whacked a filter or two on which could have made the settings realistic. And also only checked later what time the Hazards one was taken, still it says a 30sec exposure, which did seem high even for that time. --
jjron (
talk) 23:58, 17 December 2009 (UTC)reply
Support: good picture with good EV of several subjects. I'd be grateful if you added the date and a geotag to the Commons description.
NotFromUtrecht (
talk) 08:05, 17 December 2009 (UTC)reply
Thanks. (By the way: I converted your date to
ISO 8601 format, which can be understood by the wiki software, since 08/12/09 has different meanings in British/US English.)
NotFromUtrecht (
talk) 10:21, 17 December 2009 (UTC)reply
Support Excellent picture and I cannot see any technical issues myself... It's pictures like this that make me question my city-living lifestyle in favour of running away to somewhere like this... Stunning scenery...
Gazhiley (
talk) 14:16, 17 December 2009 (UTC)reply
Oppose I'm willing to change to support the nom if the photographer presents an alternative that cuts out the 1/4 of the height of the original image. I think the hill on the bottom part is distracting and blocking the blue coastline.--
Caspian blue 11:04, 20 December 2009 (UTC)reply
Just to be clear, you would like some of the bottom cropped out?
Noodle snacks (
talk) 13:05, 20 December 2009 (UTC)reply