Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Another Place3 edit2.jpg

Another Place


I belive this image is striking, well composed, has good background & colors, and adds siginicantly to the Another Place article. Created by User:Chowells.


 * Nominate and support. - Ravedave 01:23, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Support L e idiot
 * Support the third. Striking composition -- surreal, even. bcasterline t 05:07, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. beauty. really serene.  psch  e  mp  |  talk  05:38, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose -- very grainy. Why is the bottom right corner of the picture cut? - Glaurung 06:23, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Because I didn't manage to hold the camera level so so the horizon wasn't actually horizontal. It therefore had to be rotated, and I obviously didn't crop it tightly enough on the right. I'll upload an edit in a second. chowells 13:17, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. Bcaster pretty much summed it up. --Agent Aquamarine 10:44, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. Very nice image... --acfan-Talk to me 13:18, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. Very nice. Good mixture of encyclopedic and artistic value. — Cuivi é  nen , Sunday, 2 April 2006 @ 13:56 (UTC)
 * Support (3rd) I like the framing better in the first version, though. The second has too much sky and ground. Can you make a third version, slightly panoramic in format? --Janke | Talk 15:38, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Sure, see the 3rd version. chowells 16:55, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Support I'm really glad to finally see Another Place on here. StephenFalken 22:48, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Support - Quality is rather lacking but the subject is so weird.--Deglr6328 02:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I know what you mean, but it really is a difficult thing to photograph because the subjects are so sparsely distributed. With that in mind I think the composition is about as good as it can be, and I find the picture grows on me! StephenFalken 23:36, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

the third picture (edit 2) Mikeo 12:03, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Support Very stunning picture. Staxringold 06:51, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. Very nice. Great atmosphere and agree with Cuivienen - "Good mixture of encyclopedic and artistic value". Diliff  | (Talk)   (Contribs) 13:17, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Support Most excellent, I love it - Adrian Pingstone 12:30, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Support - Exceptional image :D -- light darkness (talk) 14:22, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Support excellent Mikeo 14:11, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Opose. I do not see why it is interesting.  David R. Ingham 05:41, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Support Clever idea. Perhaps caption could be amended for immediate conveyal that this is a sculpture? --Philopedia 14:19, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Support Nice image, agree with Philopedia's caption comment -- Scot t  18:46, 10 April 2006 (UTC)