Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bryce Canyon Hoodoos

Bryce Canyon Hoodoos

 * Reason:I think it is a good close-up picture of hoodoos.
 * Articles this image appears in:Hoodoo (geology) and Bryce Canyon National Park
 * Creator:Digon3

This photo has not been edited. --Digon3 13:44, 14 April 2007 (UTC) MER-C 04:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Support as nominator &mdash; Digon3 00:25, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose It's a good picture, but there are more impressive ones at Hoodoo (geology). One problem with this shot is the edge between the shadowed cliff on the left and the sky; it's got some kind of edge artifact.  Enuja 05:34, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * minor support nice pic ;-) --Penubag 08:13, 13 April 2007 (UTC)penubag
 * Oppose Over-sharpened - note 2-pixel halo around contrasty edges. --Janke | Talk 09:59, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose It certainly looks over-sharpened; the older Canon compacts are usually quite soft around high contrast margins but they do show a lot of colour fringeing, which seems greatly exaggerated here. To be fair, you are asking a lot of this sort of camera to deliver the detail people expect here. It could use a fairly heavy left/top crop and I'd still want to see more of the scene off the bottom of the frame, I think. Not a bad-looking pic though. mikaultalk 15:31, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I think you are right about the compacts are usually quite soft around high contrast margins but they do show a lot of colour fringeing. The same thing happened here Image:Bryce Canyon Hoodoos 4 edit.JPG
 * Oppose - Not sharp enough for a photo of a static subject like this; the composition and lighting aren't bad but there's a lot of fringing and not much detail. As others have said, you're really going to struggle to get a featured picture out of this camera; you might manage if you can make a many-image mosaic and downsample heavily, but it's a lot of work and far from guaranteed to give good results. --YFB ¿  00:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)