Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Mount Ararat Panorama

Mount Ararat Panorama
Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2017  at 21:48:23 (UTC)
 * Reason:Good quality. If you look hard enough, you can see Noah's Ark ;)
 * Articles in which this image appears:Mount Ararat
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Places/Panorama
 * Creator:Սէրուժ Ուրիշեան


 * Support as nominator – Étienne Dolet (talk) 21:48, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * , I don't see Noah's Ark. Which figures. I read on Twitter that they moved it to Kentucky. – Sca (talk) 22:46, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Ha! The Book of Genesis should be updated then. :D Étienne Dolet (talk) 22:55, 1 January 2017 (UTC)


 * What's with the foreground bokeh? It doesn't look natural. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 04:30, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * That's strange. It's barely noticeable though. Étienne Dolet (talk) 05:47, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Very noticeable in full size. Looks like a botched stitching job or an attempt to remove some foreground objects - you can see the seams, on both the soft areas, left & right... Oppose at least until fixed, if that is possible. Otherwise a stunning view. --Janke | Talk 09:21, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The border of the blurry zone is very noticeable - it looks like part of a lower resolution copy has been used to cover over something. But it should be fixable, if there is access to the high-res unedited original. It is a very nice view of the mountain: probably millions of similar images exist of it taken from the same viewing point but it would be hard to find one this sharp and free of haze or cloud cover. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 17:24, 7 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Oppose - Two weird large blurry spots on the bottom left and bottom right. Mattximus (talk) 18:19, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose Per other – Jobas (talk) 23:04, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment Could it be because it was a panorama shot? The description of the original photo has a Note about the quality of the photograph that I should have looked at. Étienne Dolet (talk) 23:16, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Why not crop off the bottom edge of the image, most of the part with the ploughed field - it is not necessary for the image of the mountain. Any small remaining part of the top of the blurry low-res zone could be covered by cloning adjoining high-res parts of the field? Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 17:33, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
 * That's a possibility. But cropping such a beautiful field like that is painful. Plus, making a panorama strictly a mountain isn't so appealing either. The scenery is what makes it special. Étienne Dolet (talk) 20:25, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi guys, I advice against cropping it since there is an easy fix which involves free hand manipulation of a symmetric (mirror) copy of a section from the left side (of the vertical line) to cover the right side. Vegetations are mostly texturing which changes each season, so such a modification won't affect the integrity of the image, like it would have been the case if we had touched the mountain itself. I can volunteer if no one does.
 * I would change my vote if the giant blurry parts are fixed. Mattximus (talk) 02:16, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I tested the easy fix but didn't like it. There is another fix which involves more work. I have time this Saturday but since the vote ends Jan 11, it might be too late. If no one finds an easy fix which keeps the field by that time, I will have it ready by the end of this week and the nominator can nominate it again. Yaḥyā ‎ (talk) 02:45, 10 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment The mountain part is good. The blur is on the grass at bottom left. Marvellous Spider-Man  16:32, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

--Armbrust The Homunculus 22:50, 11 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment Dear Friends, I am the author of this photo. The reason for the blurriness is strictly a result of Adobe Lightroom 6's panorama feature, after stitching the 4 original RAW images.  I noticed it only later.  I will try to do another stitch (perhaps not removing lens distortions first) and see what results we get.  If this doesn't work, I can offer the original RAW photos to anyone who would like to give it a try themselves.  Thank you.  P.S. the original (uncropped) version of the file is here. Սէրուժ (talk) 08:05, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I succeeded in reproducing this cropped version of the original panorama without any blurs. I am uploading two versions: the first with minimal crop, and the second with a crop corresponding to the above image you voted on.  Here is the first version: Mount_Ararat_and_the_Araratian_plain.jpg. Սէրուժ (talk) 08:43, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * And here is the cropped version to match above: Mount Ararat and the Araratian plain (cropped).jpg. Սէրուժ (talk) 08:47, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * FYI, there is also a single-frame image from before (taken with 28mm on 1.6x crop sensor) here: Mount Ararat from Artashat (28mm).jpg. Սէրուժ (talk) 08:50, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I also uploaded the version of this image without blur to the file location that was being voted upon on this page.Սէրուժ (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:56, 12 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Please re-nominate the newly stitched (cropped) image, I would be happy to support it. --Janke | Talk 14:50, 13 January 2017 (UTC)