Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Fog reduces visibility

Fog reduces visibility
This picture gives a very good comparison for the visibilities on a normal day with clear sky and on a foggy day at the same place. Readers can see how the fog reduces the visibility. I took the two photographs and combined them into one picture by myself. This picture appears in the articles "fog" and "visibility", in which the picture plays important roles.
 * Nominate and support. - Alanmak 09:23, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Slight oppose. The locations of both images are not nearly, if not totally, identical. You would find out the differences if you overlap one image to another -- where's the tree (or bush?) in the fog at the bottom right-hand corner? -- Jerry Crimson Mann 17:24, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I really took the two photographs at the same place. I think the difference was that the one taken on the sunny day was zoomed less closer. Other things, such as the road junction, and the little tree on the left hand side of each photograph and stuffs, are obviously the same. If somebody can still argue that the two photographs were not taken at the same place, he/she had better checked his/her eyes. :-P The purpose for the left photograph to zoom less closer is to show that the trees closer to the camera can be seen clearly, while the more distant ones are more fuzzy, due to the fog. - Alanmak 21:59, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. Now the cropping makes the image perfect. It shows a very clear concept of how fog affects visibilty, with the objects in the picture like the bridge, the building, the car, the trees. But I do hope there's a picutre of a higer resolution. -- Jerry Crimson Mann 06:27, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I had a talk with my optician, and he said my eyes were perky. >:-( Btw, where're the leaves on the top? Capped in the sunshine, huh? -- Jerry Crimson Mann 09:35, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
 * ( − ) Oppose Good idea (i've been wanting to take something like this) but the difference in position/zoom is too much and spoils the effect IMO. --Fir0002 09:29, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * I like the concept but I'm not sure this particular set of pictures is best for the purpose. For example, in the sunny picture there are flags, but not in the foggy picture.  It would be useful to have a car and person in the foggy picture.  Is the crane (is that a crane, top left?) in the sunny picture in the foggy picture or was that also missing?
 * I think the best way to take these picture would be to do it looking down a street. A perfect place to do this would be in the sunset district of San Francisco.  The advantage of a street is that there are features at regular intervals.  In this way the effect of the fog is much more apparent.  I did crop your pictures so they are the same scale. Another issue is that the image is now smaller since I had to reduce the size of the sunny picture to match similar region I cropped from the foggy picture. Alanmak, do you have larger versions of these two pictures?  David D. (Talk) 16:40, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Your cropping skills are really amazing! Looking forward to a higher quality version... -- Jerry Crimson Mann 04:31, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
 * If you have the right software it is very easy. If Alanmak uploads the original photo's I'll be happy to crop them to help this picture get support. David D. (Talk) 16:34, 4 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Some folks suggested that we can crop the two photographs for a little bit so as to make them more like each other. I have made a new version. This time I use PNG file format. Also, the two photographs are now made to have the exact same size. Please give some comments so that I can improve the picture before we vote to decide whether the picture can become a featured one. - Alanmak 23:03, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I think I like the slightly heavier crop. i wonder what other people think. I tried two versions, one that keeps the building and has two cars with their lights driving up the road (seems appropriate for the visability argument).  The other I cropped similarly to how you had it before.  I like the car version since your attention gets drawn down the road emphasising the poor visability.  On my monitor the top version seems to have more intense colour.  I actually cropped the same picture so I'm not sure why that difference is so large. David D. (Talk) 02:59, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Up to August 12th, 2005, we got six "supports" and 3 "opposes" for this picture, and the picture has been improved based on the suggestions that came with the "opposes". So, as the general consent is supporting this picture, it can now b promoted as a featured picture. Thanks to David again for his improving the pictures. But since his cropped versions were modified from the original one that I made, the sizes were reduced, and they are a little bit blurred when enlarged. As seen from the comments above, the first picture seems to be more preferred. So, let us use the first picture at this moment. Later, I may ask our fellow Wikipedias whether they want some heavier cropping for the picture. If yes, then I would make a further cropped version with higher resolution. -Alanmak 04:59, 12 August 2005 (UTC) 
 * Support. With the ccropping this becomes quite a nice picture. I would like the third one the most, but they are all good.say1988 19:49, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. I don't quite like the cars in the sunny picture. Because they are so prominent in the sunny picture, their absence in the foggy picture is rather noticeable, and take the eye away from noticing differences due to the fog. Enochlau 10:07, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. While a cool picture, I dont find it particularly striking. --ScottyBoy900Q ∞ 02:48, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Support-- I like the one at the top the best. TomStar81 01:27, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Support It illustrates well how fog reduces visibility. Hebb l 10:09, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Support good quality. Shivu § Mesg 4 Mè §  04:24, August 11, 2005 (UTC)