Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bryce Canyon Amphitheater Hoodoos Panorama.jpg

Bryce Canyon Amphitheater Panorama

 * Reason:I think it is a good, encyclopedic image of Bryce Canyon
 * Articles this image appears in:Utah, Bryce Canyon National Park, Amphitheatre, and Hoodoo (geology)
 * Creator:Digon3


 * Support as nominator &mdash; Digon3 16:14, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - we currently have this other panorama of the same place as a FP. Witty Lama 19:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
 * That is of a different amphitheater. Look at the arrangement of the hoodoos and the rock formations on the left. I also believe that mine is of better quality if you have problems with the same subject. --Digon3 19:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm simply pointing out a simmilar photo. I have not suggested that this is better or worse than the old one. It is merely there as comparison and also because it is important for others to know this exists. Witty Lama 19:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, thank-you --Digon3 19:31, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment. Is everyone else abstaining from commenting for the same reasons I have? Because I think this photograph is as good as it possibly could be: it illustrates the scope and scale of these amazing rock formations. And I also love the stormy looking sky in the distance: moody... But, aside from that, I don't know what to think. I personally think subjects like these rocks look better up close, taken with a very wide angle lens, but some guy above blasted me for that, so... perhaps I'll just keep my yap shut... --Vaelta 08:09, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh boy, at least call me by my username and not some guy. That makes me feel so insignificant :-). --Dschwen 15:52, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry! New here! Getting to know people slowly! --Vaelta 15:54, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


 * It is very discouraging that no one is bothering to vote. At least comment... --Digon3 15:03, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but one reason, at least for me, is that I have the feeling that this picture (and/or similar ones (even a segment from this very image) from your bryce canyon trip) has been nominated a gazillion times before (here, on commons QI and FP) and there is not much to add to the previous comments. --Dschwen 15:25, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Bryce_Canyon_Hoodoos_Amphitheater_Panorama.jpg|40px]]: QI+COM:FP, [[Image:Bryce_Canyon_Amphitheater_Hoodoos_Panorama.jpg|40px]]: com:QI+com:FP+en:FP, [[Image:Bryce_Canyon_Hoodoos_Amphitheater.jpg|20px]] com:QI+en:FP, [[Image:Bryce_Canyon_Hoodoos_Amphitheater_2.jpg|20px]] com:QI. Persistence is a noble character trait :-) but you have to understand that it can be a bit tiresome for the voters. --Dschwen 15:37, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * In the commons. As far as I know, few Wikipedia FPC voters also vote in the commons FPC. As for the pictures, I think this version is the best version, and it got that way from the feedback of the other versions. As for being tiresome for the Wikipedia voters, I understand how you, being both on wikipedia and commons, might find it a bit tiresome, but not to others. --Digon3 16:17, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I prefer the third image along, even though the format is not as attractive. It has more depth than all the others... perhaps just tweak the contrast on it and I might vote that up... --Vaelta 15:59, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Tried that once . It lacks detail which cannot be recovered by increasing contrast. --Digon3 16:41, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Are you really sure about that? I just took the small sized image and cranked up the contrast and it instantly looked ten times better. If you want, I'll send you it. Got somewhere it can go? --Vaelta 17:04, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Very weak oppose. The image seems a bit blurry to me. I'm not sure if that's because of the camera, because of the distance of the subject, because of the image itself, or what. Otherwise I'd support it. Amphy 17:30, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Loads more detail than the current FP. Very slightly blurry, but seeing how gigantic the picture is, I doubt any more detail could be brought out no matter if a different picture is sharper than this one. I am all for it. J     Are you green? 20:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
 * That scene is intrinsically beautiful, but I'm not quite convinced that this picture really can keep up with the technical standards of today. A year or 18 months ago I surely would have voted in support. Conversely I wouldn't dare nominating my variation of this theme. --Dschwen 20:50, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
 * A shame. I would've supported it. If fuzzy is your concern, you have a big enough file to do some size reduction to make it sharper. - Mgm|(talk) 11:41, 3 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Support. This new images has a higher resolution, and shows more of the green surroundings of the place. In addition, the part of the sky is not blown out, which it is in the current FP. - Mgm|(talk) 11:38, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Support - it's good enough, but hopefully someone can improve the contrast and sharpness enough. Let's all be nice to each other, FPC is not that big a deal. Stevage 01:52, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

--The Sunshine Man 15:37, 8 May 2007 (UTC)