File talk:Denali Vertical Drop.jpg

This image is intended to illustrate a difference by giving a sense of scale. Several problems with the execution of this image itself confound the proper impression. Possible improvements could include:

Using images of the same width, to avoid the minimizing effect of the visual foregrounding of Everest. Putting half-images side-by-side, again to avoid the minimizing effect of the visual foregrounding of Everest. Using images with similar color warmth and other image-quantitative factors.  The chief problem is that a one-dimensional difference is being executed as an two-dimensional representation even though the scale is clearly and properly marked and in one dimension only. This makes Everest appear much smaller, and detracts from the intended result of accurately conveying a sense of the difference between the two.

This is compounded by an unintended optical illusion which pushes the image to appear three-dimensional. This less quantifiable but no less effective minimization of Everest makes it appear to be somewhere in the foreground of Denali, and our sense of perspective then diminishes it to fit into a three-dimensional model.

This may be somewhat offset by the color warmth disparity, where if the warmths were reversed, Denali would appear even more remote from the viewer, but as it is, the color mismatch is merely unsettling.

Please note that I understand visual apparent rise, and I have not misunderstood the purpose of the illustration. I am also not so handy with editing software as to perform the improvements myself. I offer these comments as constructive criticism.

Finally, unless the talk page for an image is explicitly reserved for copyright issues, this really did seem like the right place for this comment. I am not discussing either mountain per se, but the illustration itself.

Haakondahl (talk) 07:11, 5 March 2011 (UTC)