Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Château de Chenonceau

Château de Chenonceau

 * Reason:Good composition providing overview of the ensemble and its relationship to the river, good technicals, and strong in making the viewer want to know more.
 * Articles this image appears in:Château de Chenonceau, Catherine de' Medici's building projects, French Renaissance architecture
 * Creator:Wladyslaw


 * Support as nominator --Elekhh (talk) 00:46, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose per missing end. Also I think and angle like this would be better as the most interesting of the architecture has been left in a third plane.  franklin   01:37, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * To cath the other end would increase distortion like here. Frontal persepective is more advantageous for the facade, however misses the tower - an important element of the composition. I disagree in regards of the comment on most interesting of the architecture. I think most interesting is the ensemble and its relationship to the water. Elekhh (talk) 01:58, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, no idea of the place, but are we sure that taking the picture close to that corner in the far left doesn't allow to get water, tower and closer facade, plus closer to frontal view.  franklin   02:09, 2 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Also, the missing part on the right can be solved (I think) with a shot in the very same place from where was taken the nominated one but turning the camera to the right and before missing the tower. Such a shot can be expected to come to Wikipedia.  franklin   02:16, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

--jjron (talk) 11:34, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Oppose per Franklin. Not seeing how far the building extends beyond the frame reduces EV too much. Might be tricky to compose but should be doable. Fletcher (talk) 02:29, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * There is no way to capture everything in one image. Any picture is just a fragment of the real experience of a building. Just like this or this FPs. Elekhh (talk) 05:59, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Very true. I note both of those examples focus on a single architectural element, rather than the whole building. This photo captures almost the whole building, but not quite.  Similarly, many portraits capture only the head and shoulders of a person.  But if someone nominated a portrait that captured nearly the whole person, but was cut off at the feet, I would oppose. Fletcher (talk) 14:35, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I think we need better examples to stablish a precedent in FP. One is a picture of a "campanile" (belfry) and a spire and thats why they are supposed to show only those architectural elements of the respective buildings. Moreover it has not been stablished the imposibility of getting this castle as a whole in frame.  franklin   02:07, 7 December 2009 (UTC)