Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/360° panorama: Summit of Goat Peak, Northern Cascades

360° panorama: Summit of Goat Peak, Northern Cascades

 * Reason:The image has a high degree of encyclopedic value in that it provides an unaltered 360° of the Methow River Valley and the northeastern Cascades of Washington State: a rather remote region. Goat Peak has a large prominence allowing for views not achievable from other overlooks. The difficulty in reaching this vantage spot adds to its value to Wikipedia, allowing many users who would otherwise be unable to experience this view an opportunity. This image also has a very high resolution along with excellent technical execution.
 * Articles this image appears in:Goat Peak, William O. Douglas Wilderness
 * Creator:Farwestern


 * Support as nominator --Farwestern (talk) 20:43, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Nice big image. But it seems the brightness/white-balance of the sky is undulating. --Dschwen 21:07, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * And remarkably well stitched for a handheld 360 with this much foreground. There is a disturbing artifact at the center bottom edge of the frame and also in the center there are visible stitching artifacts in the tree tops (darker oof frames, broken blending). --Dschwen 21:12, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Support This last set of 3 nominated panoramas are just beautiful. Staxringold talkcontribs 04:13, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Support I can see the stiching errors Dschwen mentions, however I feel that they are unnoticable unless you are specifically looking for them, and even then the size of the file means that it takes ages to find! So weak support unless these can be corrected in which case I would change to full support. Otherwise fantastic image again... Gazhiley (talk) 11:07, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose In the right you can see the shadow of the photographer. Distracting. Can be eliminated with cropping from the right.  Franklin.vp   12:11, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The price would be sacrificing a complete 360 view. This seems like a bad deal to me. MTV-Generation: easily distracted ;-) --Dschwen 13:29, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I haven't watch any TV since 4 years ago and that was in Cuba, so no MTV at all. In any case we are criticizing the picture not me or you. The picture is supposed to be one of the summit of that peak and not of the photographer, and that shadow is a strong element in the picture. It is next to one of the areas of highest contrast in the picture (those rocks in the foreground) and is quite noticeable. In my opinion it is subtracting EV to the picture.  Franklin.vp   14:42, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't have much experience with 360 degree panoramas, but, logically, wouldn't a photographer shadow be more or less inevitable in strong sunlight assuming the photographer isn't moving while he makes the panorama? Also, support per above. Perhaps cloning out the lens flare would be of benefit here as well? Cowtowner 02:18, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose, mainly for the flaws Dswchen pointed out, especially the apparent shift in white balance for the sky. I don't mind the photographer's shadow, though.--ragesoss (talk) 02:53, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose Its a nice photo and would be worthy if it were not for the joining issues across the top of the mountain range as well as the photographers shadow. Fix these and I will change my vote as soon as it is brought to my attention. P.o.o.r.P.h.o.t.o.r.e.m.o.v.i.l.s.t. (talk) 22:01, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Can be changed to suspended on nominator's request. Shoemaker's Holiday Over 206 FCs served 02:43, 22 September 2009 (UTC)