Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Buzk's Gard National Nature Park

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2022 at 19:10:24 (UTC)

Support as nominator – TheFreeWorld (talk) 19:10, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A little further down the page than I'd like, but it feels reasonably prominent. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.8% of all FPs} 09:33, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Stunningly gorgeous photo! --Janke | Talk 19:32, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 03:24, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Lots of texture. –Sca (talk) 13:20, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not encyclopaedic. Too much 'artistic' editing including vignetting. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:42, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. This is too manipulated, which greatly reduces the EV. Nick-D (talk) 09:31, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The unnatural combination of low contrast, high saturation, and vignetting make this look more like a painting than a photograph. I agree with the others above that the image editing crosses the line beyond technical correction and into unencyclopedic artistic effects. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:05, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Absolutely gorgeous image, but I agree with the above comments that its encyclopedic value is questionable. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 19:04, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It should be added to Examples of technical problems as an example of overdone tone mapping and hyper-vignetting. I feel like I'm blacking out. -- Veggies (talk) 23:00, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:34, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]