Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Keswick Panorama - Oct 2009.jpg
- Reason
- It's a detailed and aesthetic view of an important area in the Lake District.
- Articles this image appears in
- Lake District and Walla Crag
- Creator
- User:Diliff
- Support as nominator --Ðiliff «» (Talk) 11:20, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
- Support. You really capture the spirit of the Lake District (apart from the weather- who's ever heard of sun in the Lake District?) and everything looks crisp and perfect. This is a worthy candidate for our first Cumbrian FP :) J Milburn (talk) 11:51, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. :-) After all the silly discussion yesterday I did notice that you were from Cumbria. I'm jealous. I'd love to live up there, but unfortunately all the jobs are in London! For the record though, it's not the first Cumbrian FP! Ðiliff «» (Talk) 12:01, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
- Gosh, I don't know how I missed all them. Right, if there are that many, it looks like it's time for Portal:Cumbria to get a reshaking... So much to do, so little time... J Milburn (talk) 12:09, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. :-) After all the silly discussion yesterday I did notice that you were from Cumbria. I'm jealous. I'd love to live up there, but unfortunately all the jobs are in London! For the record though, it's not the first Cumbrian FP! Ðiliff «» (Talk) 12:01, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
- Support. Good. Would actually like to see it more prominent (bigger) in Lake District and less prominent in Walla Crag (as I've said before I find images of views from a location of lowish EV in an article about the place they were taken from). Not worth adding to Keswick, Cumbria (guessing that's the right town)? --jjron (talk) 13:32, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
- I did actually increase the size in the Lake District article but someone changed it back to 300px. Oh well, there will always be those who dislike large thumbnails, or have a ridiculously small screen. ;-) I would add it to Keswick, Cumbria, although there is already a somewhat similar image (taken from the hills visible in this photo) which shows the village better/more prominently, although I much prefer the lighting/conditions in this shot. I agree with you about 'views from', but there was an article describing the summit and views, so I figured it was an appropriate place to put it. Lake District is where it has the most EV IMO. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 14:31, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful. I disagree with the show more water thing. Nezzadar ☎ 13:54, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
- Comment Very nice, but everything appears a bit blotchy on my monitor. Did you use the sharpening tool a bit too much (sharpening artifacts)? --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 20:12, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
- I didn't touch the sharpening, and I didn't downsample either. This is straight out of the camera (apart from level adjustments and stitching etc obviously). I think it's slightly noisy though (eg in the sky), is that what you mean by blotchy? I also think the trees on the hillside are perhaps a bit blotchy too - a little like a watercolour painting. ;-) I don't know why, but my camera seems to output detail in trees like that sometimes. You don't notice it so much when it's downsampled, but at 100% it can look a bit blotchy. I don't know what else to tell you. It's just how the camera saved it - the 5D isn't perfect, I guess. :-) I don't think it's too bad given the resolution and detail visible though. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 21:17, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
- Support It's a bit noisy but given this resolution, it still is FP worthy imo. --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 21:47, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
- I didn't touch the sharpening, and I didn't downsample either. This is straight out of the camera (apart from level adjustments and stitching etc obviously). I think it's slightly noisy though (eg in the sky), is that what you mean by blotchy? I also think the trees on the hillside are perhaps a bit blotchy too - a little like a watercolour painting. ;-) I don't know why, but my camera seems to output detail in trees like that sometimes. You don't notice it so much when it's downsampled, but at 100% it can look a bit blotchy. I don't know what else to tell you. It's just how the camera saved it - the 5D isn't perfect, I guess. :-) I don't think it's too bad given the resolution and detail visible though. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 21:17, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
- Support Amazing --Anhamirak 20:16, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
- Support. Well done. Mostlyharmless (talk) 00:52, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
- Support Very well done. — raeky (talk | edits) 04:46, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
- Support per nom. Noodle snacks (talk) 05:15, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
- Support per nom. NotFromUtrecht (talk) 08:23, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
- Support — Jake Wartenberg 03:28, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
- Support: Beautiful. Elekhh (talk) 14:37, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
- Support --Avala (talk) 18:12, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
- Support beautiful quality image. ~ Arjun 20:14, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
- Support Just beutiful 93gregsonl2 (talk) 22:37, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
- Support - Excellent detail and resolution. - ☩Damërung ☩. -- 09:21, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Promoted File:Keswick Panorama - Oct 2009.jpg –blurpeace (talk) 23:39, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
- Please do not promote images when there is not a clear consensus. Ha ha ha. Nezzadar [SPEAK] 02:22, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
