Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Derwent Water, Keswick - June 2009.jpg

File:Derwent Water, Keswick - June 2009.jpg

 * Reason:It's a very aesthetic and interesting view of Derwent Water in the Lake Distict. There is plenty of detail, dramatic lighting and important aspects of the lake are visible, including the pier, glacier-carved mountains surrounding it, a little island on the lake and the ducks and geese that inhabit the lake.
 * Articles this image appears in:Derwent Water
 * Creator:User:Diliff


 * Support as nominator --Diliff  | (Talk)   (Contribs) 10:26, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Support Excellent picture, very high quality and great detail - another pearler from Diliff! HOWEVER my weak support is only that i feel a slightly more elevated shot of the lake would give a higher EV as this picture doesn't show how big the lake is... Other than that, pretty much spot on... Gazhiley (talk) 11:02, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Support Good aesthetics and lighting. --Muhammad (talk) 16:06, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Support. Great use of grad ND (?), painting like sky, yet it still looks believably natural. Nice. Are you sure this is level though, it seems to be tilted slightly to the left. But it may be an illusion. --Dschwen 16:28, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Support. The 10th Kingdom :) Brand[t] 21:34, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Support per the nom and above. Beautiful.  —  Jake   Wartenberg  22:45, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Support another great work. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 10:17, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. The water to the right of the furthest jetty looks a bit blurred to me, and so does the red boat and the edges of the shoreline behind them. One of the posts of the fence that extends out into the water (coordinates 1856, 1456) also seems quite blurred. Since the post is vertically below the blurred area by the jetty, I wondered whether this might be a stitching error that can be fixed? NotFromUtrecht (talk) 13:08, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It's not so much a stitching fault - more the fact that one of the component images in the panorama was slightly blurred (it was quite windy and the exposure was fairly long - 1/20th of a second) even though the camera was sitting on a tripod. I debated downsampling the image to stop it being so visible, but decided that higher resolution is better, even if it does result in the slight blur being noticeable. Unfortunately it's not something that can be fixed, but clearly the resolution would be more than sufficicient for FPC if downsampled. So while it isn't ideal, I think the image should be judged at an appropriate zoom level as well as at 100%. Diliff  | (Talk)   (Contribs) 15:33, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Support. It's a tiny imperfection, so no point downsampling. Fantastic picture, by the way. NotFromUtrecht (talk) 06:50, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Support - This is beautiful! --  Anh ' ami ' rak    02:13, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

--Shoemaker's Holiday Over 197 FCs served 09:30, 20 August 2009 (UTC)