Taj Mahal
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2014 at 14:43:50 (UTC)
.jpeg)
- Reason
- It think it passes the criteria. And so far the best quality image of Taj Mahal exists here.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Taj Mahal
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
- Creator
- Yann
- Support as nominator – Jim Carter 14:43, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose I'm not a fan of the light -- Muhammad (talk) 15:37, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
- Support Alt-1 , PER The Herald, Yan, osv. This is a different picture, in daylight, showing the garden and the pond. Hafspajen ( talk) 13:42, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Strong Oppose -- Prefer a withdraw. Poorest lighting I have ever seen in any Taj Mahal pic. I had seen it in Agra, in a better light, at 5 o' clock in winter. Jim, never look in the WOW factor. It seems to be a curse on Taj Mahal's pics that they never have a place in FPs like this buddy. I had even tried before..-- The herald 14:29, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
- Taj Mahal does looks different in sunset, sunrise - at night, and so on - it is actually quite famous for it. It has a very special glow, so many different pictures about it is quite in order. Hafspajen ( talk) 14:50, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Yep dude, I know that. But I'll Support edited version (only if you make it Alt.1) because of the better lighting. The current candidate is far below the expected qualities of the Taj Mahal (poorest lighting)..-- The herald 07:36, 26 October 2014 (UTC)- Added Alt-1 @ The Herald: Jim Carter 12:53, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- Support Alt.1 Fine for me now. I would like to see this one go through The Fire, @ Hafspajen:,@ Rreagan007:,@ Yann:---See this Alt. bros. and then decide the better one...-- The herald 14:25, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- Support I think my pic is quite good. ;o) Yann ( talk) 18:02, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
- Support The lighting doesn't bother me. Rreagan007 ( talk) 18:53, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
- Weak oppose Agreed with Muhammad, for me, the lighting seems 'dull'. ///EuroCar GT 21:36, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
- Comment:@
The Herald and
EuroCarGT:, not pinging Muhammad for some reasons. I have uploaded a
edited version please take a look and share you thoughts. Cheers,
Jim Carter
04:15, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose that too, the top of the domes are blown -- Muhammad (talk) 09:22, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- Comment For me, I will compare this image to mine File:Taj Mahal 2012.jpg. And I see it falling short in all aspects apart from the sky. The sharpness is mediocre and the light and the resolution (of the actual Taj) are all not as good. -- Muhammad (talk) 09:27, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- Muhammad, since you took this picture so it is reasonable that you will prefer your image. And as for Sharpness and light, it is FP level (I think). In your image the marbles looks brownish whereas the original color is white (although it varies with time of the day, but the original color is white). Cheers, Jim Carter 12:53, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- Comment I think as a landscape architect, that in the composition, the garden shown is an asset. Hafspajen ( talk) 14:23, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- No more flogging Muhammad..There is nothing bad as so called domes... Perfect for my eyes which have seen the real one (though editing made it more perfect). Plus your Taj Mahal was no even was a substitute..-- The herald 14:25, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- Nobody is flogging anyone. I love Muhammad, he is one of our most talented contributor, a truly good asset. He is a great photographer. We are only discussing an image - that's all. Hafspajen ( talk) 14:28, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- The domes in the edit were indeed blown, any person can check that. Of course, I am biased for my image but it shows what is really possible in terms of sharpness. But enough from me, I will stop with my flogging ;) I'm amused to say the least. -- Muhammad (talk) 19:44, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- Support alt More light is fine, but too much is not good. I uploaded over your alternative. I hope it is OK. Regards,
Yann (
talk)
16:03, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- Or may be you want to support File:Taj Mahal, Agra, India edit2.jpg, an edited version of this, which is QI and FP on Commons. Yann ( talk) 20:28, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Promoted File:Taj Mahal (Edited).jpeg -- Armbrust The Homunculus 14:57, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Taj Mahal
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2014 at 14:43:50 (UTC)
- Reason
- It think it passes the criteria. And so far the best quality image of Taj Mahal exists here.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Taj Mahal
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
- Creator
- Yann
- Support as nominator – Jim Carter 14:43, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose I'm not a fan of the light -- Muhammad (talk) 15:37, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
- Support Alt-1 , PER The Herald, Yan, osv. This is a different picture, in daylight, showing the garden and the pond. Hafspajen ( talk) 13:42, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Strong Oppose -- Prefer a withdraw. Poorest lighting I have ever seen in any Taj Mahal pic. I had seen it in Agra, in a better light, at 5 o' clock in winter. Jim, never look in the WOW factor. It seems to be a curse on Taj Mahal's pics that they never have a place in FPs like this buddy. I had even tried before..-- The herald 14:29, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
- Taj Mahal does looks different in sunset, sunrise - at night, and so on - it is actually quite famous for it. It has a very special glow, so many different pictures about it is quite in order. Hafspajen ( talk) 14:50, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Yep dude, I know that. But I'll Support edited version (only if you make it Alt.1) because of the better lighting. The current candidate is far below the expected qualities of the Taj Mahal (poorest lighting)..-- The herald 07:36, 26 October 2014 (UTC)- Added Alt-1 @ The Herald: Jim Carter 12:53, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- Support Alt.1 Fine for me now. I would like to see this one go through The Fire, @ Hafspajen:,@ Rreagan007:,@ Yann:---See this Alt. bros. and then decide the better one...-- The herald 14:25, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- Support I think my pic is quite good. ;o) Yann ( talk) 18:02, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
- Support The lighting doesn't bother me. Rreagan007 ( talk) 18:53, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
- Weak oppose Agreed with Muhammad, for me, the lighting seems 'dull'. ///EuroCar GT 21:36, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
- Comment:@
The Herald and
EuroCarGT:, not pinging Muhammad for some reasons. I have uploaded a
edited version please take a look and share you thoughts. Cheers,
Jim Carter
04:15, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose that too, the top of the domes are blown -- Muhammad (talk) 09:22, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- Comment For me, I will compare this image to mine File:Taj Mahal 2012.jpg. And I see it falling short in all aspects apart from the sky. The sharpness is mediocre and the light and the resolution (of the actual Taj) are all not as good. -- Muhammad (talk) 09:27, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- Muhammad, since you took this picture so it is reasonable that you will prefer your image. And as for Sharpness and light, it is FP level (I think). In your image the marbles looks brownish whereas the original color is white (although it varies with time of the day, but the original color is white). Cheers, Jim Carter 12:53, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- Comment I think as a landscape architect, that in the composition, the garden shown is an asset. Hafspajen ( talk) 14:23, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- No more flogging Muhammad..There is nothing bad as so called domes... Perfect for my eyes which have seen the real one (though editing made it more perfect). Plus your Taj Mahal was no even was a substitute..-- The herald 14:25, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- Nobody is flogging anyone. I love Muhammad, he is one of our most talented contributor, a truly good asset. He is a great photographer. We are only discussing an image - that's all. Hafspajen ( talk) 14:28, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- The domes in the edit were indeed blown, any person can check that. Of course, I am biased for my image but it shows what is really possible in terms of sharpness. But enough from me, I will stop with my flogging ;) I'm amused to say the least. -- Muhammad (talk) 19:44, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- Support alt More light is fine, but too much is not good. I uploaded over your alternative. I hope it is OK. Regards,
Yann (
talk)
16:03, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- Or may be you want to support File:Taj Mahal, Agra, India edit2.jpg, an edited version of this, which is QI and FP on Commons. Yann ( talk) 20:28, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Promoted File:Taj Mahal (Edited).jpeg -- Armbrust The Homunculus 14:57, 1 November 2014 (UTC)