Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Australian House of Representatives - Parliament of Australia.jpg

Australian House of Representatives
Voting period ends on 22 Feb 2012 at 07:13:25 (UTC)
 * Reason:High quality panorama of the Australian House of Representatives. I jumped into the "no public access" area to take this panorama. I rested the camera on the bench there (each exposure was 2.5 seconds) and carefully rotated the camera around a guess at the nodal point of the lens to avoid stitching errors. In the sense of including all of the chairs, this is the only "complete" panorama on commons, and it is certainly the highest quality image.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Australian House of Representatives, Parliament of Australia, Parliament House, Canberra, Parliament, List of Australian Leaders of the Opposition
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
 * Creator:JJ Harrison


 * Support as nominator --JJ Harrison (talk) 07:13, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Support Great quality and solid EV. A version with all the MPs there would have been much better, but if you'd tried to take that from the public galleries you would have been kicked out. Nick-D (talk) 07:49, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, no photography is allowed whilst the House of Representatives is in session. I did collect the appropriate contact details to get special permission, but it was a moot point - parliament was not sitting at any time during my visit. JJ Harrison (talk) 07:58, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Support Per above. Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:57, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak support per Senate one. Doesn't seem as crisp as the Senate one, particularly in some areas, and I assume it's the combination of the shooting angle and stitching that has slightly distorted the chamber (as well as partly cutting off the flag, etc). And I'm still trying to work out why the writing on the clocks and the signs below them looks to have been blurred out. (Mind you, if I wasn't comparing it side-by-side with the one above I may well full support). --jjron (talk) 09:01, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Support. Way to be sneaky. Clegs (talk) 08:18, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Regretful weak oppose has issues with blur, and seems to have some blown highlights. Pinetalk 10:23, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Support This is sharp when evaluated at criteria-resolution. Good EV, good composition, nice colours. (negative: A tiny bit of chromatic aberration visible on the lights, even at criteria-resolution.) --99of9 (talk) 01:13, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Support I really don't think we are going to get anything much better. It does have some minor blur, and some blown highlights, but I don't think these outweigh the encyclopedic value. Dusty777 (talk) 17:46, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 13:56, 22 February 2012 (UTC)