Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Cirrus sky panorama.jpg

Cirrus Sky Panorama

 * Reason:Good technicals and a good example of this type of cloud formation. Compares favourably with the exisiting FP
 * Articles this image appears in:Cirrus cloud
 * Creator:Fir0002


 * Support as nominator --Fir0002 07:55, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Nice but a bit bright for me, maybe just half a stop over. Any chance of a darker version? --mikaultalk 12:57, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Definitely possible to do a darker version but I prefer this one (sunny day + white clouds = this version being realistic). If there are more people wanting a darker version I'll do a reprocess/restitch... --Fir0002 03:26, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. I agree with Fir0002 that the brightness of the clouds seems appropriate and more realistic than a darkened version.  My concern is the lack of metadata (in particular, focal length, so that angle of view can be determined, or perhaps this is stitched from multiple frames?) and the difficultly for me, as the viewer, of determining how much of the curved appearance is the actual shape of the clouds and how much of it is an artifact.  I'm used to viewing distorted landscape panoramas and so understand roughly how to interpret them (for the standard kind, as a view obtained by panning one's view horizontally), but I'm not sure how to make sense of perspective in this shot.--ragesoss (talk) 15:45, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Fair point - this was a 5 shot portrait pano at 19mm. FOV is approx 135 degrees. I'll add that to the image description page --Fir0002 08:27, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Support. Strong technicals, good enc.  Spencer T♦ Nominate! 01:48, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Support: Nailed it, and looks more like a "mare's tail" than the other images in the article.  Mae din \talk 12:08, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Neutral Not really convinced that a cylindrical projection (which distorts straight lines) is a requirement to illustrate this. Noodle snacks (talk) 12:43, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Conditional oppose If the clouds are meant to be straight then IMO this misleading. --Muhammad (talk) 06:41, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The stitching did introduce most of the curving but the clouds are not typically straight. So personally I don't think it's an issue and the benefits of the extra information from that wide (and tall) FOV outweigh the inherent limitations of panoramic projection. That said I've uploaded a single frame which addresses your concern. --Fir0002 13:07, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Support    Sophus Bie  (talk) 02:30, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

--Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 19:20, 12 July 2009 (UTC)