- Reason
- High resolution image of the landscape. Cropped effectively, and not too bright.
- Articles this image appears in
- Jinshanling
- Creator
- Suicup
- Support as nominator -- Suicup ( talk) 01:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose Poor lighting/time of day - near side is in too deep shadow whilst sky is blown. Also whole image suffers unsharpness/from bad jpeg compression. Mfield ( talk) 02:26, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- If the lighting/sharpness is corrected in Photoshop would you reconsider?
Suicup (
talk)
04:13, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- You will not be able to recover this one with PS. There's simply no fine detail present and there's not enough information in the shadows. It needs to be reshot with better lighting.
Mfield (
talk)
04:16, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- Fair enough. For some reason the photo looks better in iPhoto on my computer - after uploading to wiki the colours don't seem as rich, and there is a blue hue.
Suicup (
talk)
04:20, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- That's a color profile issue then - e.g. they will look different in Firefox compared to iPhoto or Safari on a Mac as Firefox doesn't support colorsync. Mfield ( talk) 04:30, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- Fair enough. For some reason the photo looks better in iPhoto on my computer - after uploading to wiki the colours don't seem as rich, and there is a blue hue.
Suicup (
talk)
04:20, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- You will not be able to recover this one with PS. There's simply no fine detail present and there's not enough information in the shadows. It needs to be reshot with better lighting.
Mfield (
talk)
04:16, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- Strong oppose Aesthetically pleasing thumbnail ... BUT we're judging the full picture. It's just a poor quality picture. The hills on the right side are just ... BLAH. crassic![ talk 02:29, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose Dreadful focus and very poor lighting. Snapshot-quality. Spencer T♦ C 22:19, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Not promoted MER-C 10:50, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
- Reason
- High resolution image of the landscape. Cropped effectively, and not too bright.
- Articles this image appears in
- Jinshanling
- Creator
- Suicup
- Support as nominator -- Suicup ( talk) 01:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose Poor lighting/time of day - near side is in too deep shadow whilst sky is blown. Also whole image suffers unsharpness/from bad jpeg compression. Mfield ( talk) 02:26, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- If the lighting/sharpness is corrected in Photoshop would you reconsider?
Suicup (
talk)
04:13, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- You will not be able to recover this one with PS. There's simply no fine detail present and there's not enough information in the shadows. It needs to be reshot with better lighting.
Mfield (
talk)
04:16, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- Fair enough. For some reason the photo looks better in iPhoto on my computer - after uploading to wiki the colours don't seem as rich, and there is a blue hue.
Suicup (
talk)
04:20, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- That's a color profile issue then - e.g. they will look different in Firefox compared to iPhoto or Safari on a Mac as Firefox doesn't support colorsync. Mfield ( talk) 04:30, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- Fair enough. For some reason the photo looks better in iPhoto on my computer - after uploading to wiki the colours don't seem as rich, and there is a blue hue.
Suicup (
talk)
04:20, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- You will not be able to recover this one with PS. There's simply no fine detail present and there's not enough information in the shadows. It needs to be reshot with better lighting.
Mfield (
talk)
04:16, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- Strong oppose Aesthetically pleasing thumbnail ... BUT we're judging the full picture. It's just a poor quality picture. The hills on the right side are just ... BLAH. crassic![ talk 02:29, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose Dreadful focus and very poor lighting. Snapshot-quality. Spencer T♦ C 22:19, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Not promoted MER-C 10:50, 27 May 2008 (UTC)