Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Heron Bommie

Heron Bommie
Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2012 at 03:42:18 (UTC)
 * Reason:High quality and EV, extremely high resolution
 * Articles in which this image appears:Seaview SVII
 * FP category for this image:Natural phenomena/Others
 * Creator:Uploaded by User:Hersfold, image credit belongs to Underwater Earth/Catlin Seaview Survey


 * Support as nominator --Hers fold  (t/a/c) 03:42, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
 * support While perhaps not the greatest image its interesting on a technical level and the OTRS release looks solid.©Geni 04:59, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Support It is rare to be able to get underwater photography of such high resolution and quality. Plus great wow factor. -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 05:32, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Support per KoH  JKadavoor    Jee  15:49, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Support I think it's an excellent underwater image, and it's difficult to get underwater imagery of such quality. Eire102 (talk) 19:57, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose I'm going to have to oppose here, first, we have tons of great underwater photography freely licensed on Commons. The big issue with this is the perspective is just VERY strange, it stretches very weirdly along the bottom and is nothing at all like a "normal" perspective. I don't know what scientific parameters they're using to capture the images with this kind of distortion, or if it can be programically undone or is done so it can be stitched together better with automated software or what, but this image is just weird and hurts my head to look at it. Therefore I can't support it as "our best work." — raeky  t  08:58, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't want to seem like I'm hounding, but as the caption mentions, the distortion is actually part of the EV of the image. The image is captured as a 360-degree panorama, allowing the viewer to look in any direction when it's rendered properly (up and down as well as left and right and such). When rendered in that form, there is little to no distortion at the top and bottom "edges." Here, the image is rendered similar to a map of the world - I think using the Mercator projection, although I may be wrong. The point being, the image is best represented as the inside surface of a sphere, and that's how it was meant to be displayed. That distortion you see is indicative of this, and the best way we have at our disposal to demonstrate that to the reader within our article. Hers fold  non-admin (t/a/c) 15:22, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Maybe it would have good EV for an article on the method of making that 360 view if we have one, or that projection method, but otherwise I think it has less EV... is that how all the images are taken for that survey to be displayed for google? Looks like only a very small few was used by Google for some novelty on their maps program, the majority of the images from this project I doubt are rendered this way since it would make it more difficult to do a survey for which they're intended. Rendered this way, viewing this way, it's odd.... EV for this project is low, an image of the actual underwater craft would be MUCH higher EV... — raeky  t  16:49, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
 * All of the images taken as part of this survey are available in the proper 3D view on the group's website - there's a link to one such tour at the bottom of the article. Some - in time, maybe all, I'm not entirely sure - will eventually be available on Google as well (they've six locations already). They also provide public access to the "flat" versions like this one, which is where I downloaded this image after handling the copyright stuff. So no, they likely won't use "flat" versions of the image for survey data, but we have no means by which to display the 3D version here. I agree it looks odd, but it does make it very clear that the image is meant to be seen in a 3D view, thus illustrating the capabilities of the camera. (Since you mention it, the article does contain an image of the camera itself, but it's a little fuzzy and not FP-quality.) Hers fold  non-admin (t/a/c) 17:22, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
 * We do have the means. I've added the appropriate template to the image page to link there. JJ Harrison (talk) 22:30, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Ooooohhhh... :-O Pretty. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 01:50, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Would potentially change my vote if the caption linked to the toolserver version of the image..... — raeky  t  20:05, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I added a link to the caption in the article last night, and there's one here now as well. Hers fold  non-admin (t/a/c) 21:12, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Support Mediran  talk 10:48, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Support The image is being used to illustrate this particular scientific photography endeavor, and it is the proper choice of subject and shows the distortions. -Fjozk (talk) 16:52, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Support, simply breathtaking panoramic vista. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:05, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

--Julia\talk 19:41, 8 November 2012 (UTC)