Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore MMK.jpg

Karnataka High Court

 * Reason:Good quality, EV, lighting. High resolution as well.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Karnataka High Court, Cubbon Park, History of Bangalore
 * Creator:Muhammad Mahdi Karim


 * Support as nominator --Muhammad (talk) 19:07, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Attractive, colorful, and worldly. It seems the brightness could be punched up. In Photoshop, I tried +29 brightness, +9 contrast, and +12 saturation and seemed brighter and more inviting. If not, I still support. Greg L (talk) 19:58, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. I think it's bright enough as it is. Certainly the brightest orange building I've ever seen in my life. :-) Is there any reason why you didn't take the photo from precisely straight on? The slight dissymmetry is a shame. &#208;iliff    &#171;&#187;  (Talk)  20:22, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I note that the central lamp post, the end lamp posts (relative to the columns behind), the flagpole, and other items such as the spires at the roof apex, are very slightly out of alignment. It appears the picture was taken perhaps about a 50 centimeters to the left of the centerline (for a one-meter ∆). This sort of thing often happens in aviation pictures where the photographer will do his best to get smack on the centerline off the plane’s nose. It’s not until they get back to the darkroom (or computer nowadays), that they discover they were off maybe 10 centimeters, which really stands out when it becomes a full-page glossy advertisement. A half-meter or so on a big building isn’t much; you must have an awfully sensitive eye, for when I take the left half and flip it over to the right, nothing appreciably changes except that there are much fewer shadows.  Greg L (talk) 23:21, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I was not allowed to take pictures from inside the Cubbon Park where the building is situated. So I stood outside a metal fence and took pictures through the space between the bars. I tried to be as centrally placed as possible but If I remember correctly, a larger bar was in the middle of the fence and that probably led to the slight mis-alignment --Muhammad (talk) 02:49, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah I see, I sympathise then! There's usually a good reason. :-) &#208;iliff    &#171;&#187;  (Talk)  08:41, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Support I must withdraw a previous comment about neoclassic buildings having little wow effect... :) Good lighting and the birds add further dynamism. Elekhh (talk) 08:20, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Question Why cut off? Papa Lima Whiskey  (talk) 09:12, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It is impossible to see the whole building from ground level. I have tried to include as much as possible and you can confirm this by comparing with other images of the court. --Muhammad (talk) 13:15, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I take it this was done as a single exposure, and you cropped it where the trees start to conceal the rest of the building? Papa Lima Whiskey  (talk) 17:09, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Stitched image, otherwise yes --Muhammad (talk) 17:34, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, well I'll weak oppose for now since I generally don't agree with that kind of cropping - I think it's better to actually include one tree either side because that gives an idea of how the subject is framed in real life. It works for some subjects, not for others - difficult to decide without having seen the wider crop. Papa Lima Whiskey  (talk) 19:17, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Looks like the most ideal crop to me. File:Karnataka High Court.jpg gives a different perspective which may help others decide.  Jujutacular  T · C 18:24, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Support despite some sympathy with PLW's view. Nice work, good subject. --Avenue (talk) 04:08, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Nice Hive001   contact  16:25, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

— Mae din \talk 06:23, 4 May 2010 (UTC)