Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Porto Covo pano April 2009-4.jpg

Coastal surf in the Atlantic Ocean

 * Reason:It is an unusual yet encyclopaedic depiction of a coastal surf area, as a high resolution panorama. There are no miracles and the problem posed by the moving subject had to be solved through a detailed and patient cloning job which took profit of the fractal nature of the ocean surface's geometry (as well as of my knowledge of the waves, as an oceanographer...).
 * Articles this image appears in:Atlantic Ocean, Wind wave, Coast
 * Creator:Alvesgaspar (talk)


 * Support as nominator --Alvesgaspar (talk) 15:19, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Support Wladyslaw (talk) 10:56, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I have the feeling that the picture is quite underexposed. My thesis is based on the shadows angle which is rather steep. Even so a very nice picture. --Richard Bartz (talk) 16:43, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe a question of taste. What about the edited version? -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 17:42, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe. But tastes good. Support Alt1 --Richard Bartz (talk) 18:23, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Support Edit 1. A fine illustration of Portugal's Atlantic coast. Mostlyharmless (talk) 04:00, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Support Edit 1. I imagine it could also illustrate a local geography article for Porto or Portugal? Diliff  | (Talk)   (Contribs) 10:32, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Perhaps at Porto_Covo.  Spencer T♦ Nominate! 23:53, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the hint but there is really no article there. Maybe when I write one... Alvesgaspar (talk) 08:07, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * It's an idea.. Sometimes a good photo acts as a catalyst to improving the article that it lives in. :-) Diliff  | (Talk)   (Contribs) 08:38, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Please chop off the black line. MER-C 11:23, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose Sky is blotchy (and indeed needs the black line at the top cropped off), there is a significant stitching error in a wave (~1/4 from the LHS), sharpness is mediocre and the EV in the articles is questionable at best. --Fir0002 05:33, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I thought it was already done. It is OK now. Alvesgaspar (talk) 14:05, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Support Edit1 per nom --Muhammad (talk) 15:16, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Original and edit duplicates => MER-C 08:44, 2 May 2009 (UTC)