Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Olympus Mons

Satellite View of Olympus Mons

 * Reason:This is a fantasic composite image created using the Planetary Image Cartography System developed by the United States Geological Survey, in Arizona. This high resolution image is one of the best of the tallest volcano in the solar system.
 * Articles this image appears in:Olympus Mons
 * Creator:Jody Swann/Tammy Becker/Alfred McEwen (NASA)


 * Support as nominator --Sedd&sigma;n talk Editor Review 15:20, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose The image is full of stitching errors (or possibly not stitching errors, but bits of lower-resolution imagery used in the mosaic). Time3000 (talk) 15:35, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I do see the composite sitching errors, but even with the sitching errors i do not know of any better quality public domain image. The one image i found that was better is an image from Mars Express but that spacecraft is an ESA probe and thier images arn't released totally into the public domain and do not qualify. The difficulty in obtaining an improved any improved image whilst keeping the resolution and then compositing is also extremely high. Sedd&sigma;n talk Editor Review 16:09, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Support edit 1 Time3000 (talk) 09:18, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Weak support unless lighting issues are fixed. If fixed, strong support. Not flawless, but wow! Beautiful. Dhatfield (talk) 16:43, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * When you say lighting issue, do you want me to attempt to get all of the picture at the same brightness, specifically where there are 2 adjoining segmants in the composite? I think thats what you mean anyway. Sedd&sigma;n talk Editor Review 16:49, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Not exactly. For example, there is a mismatch in the lighting on the right of the volcano at an angle around 11 o'clock, most visible in the bottom right at thumb res because it's quite smoothed out. Similar below the volcano to the left, but that is definitely a seam-line. Dhatfield (talk) 17:53, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong support Edit 1. Fantastic, improved. Dhatfield (talk) 08:32, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Support image has enough uniqueness to overcome the slight composite stitching errors. Clegs (talk) 17:19, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment  Viewed at full size the image does have quite a few stiching errors and some photographs are sharper than others so there's an uneven distribution of detail from one to the next. I did brighten some of the area to the left of the volcano if anyone would like to see the edit or just keep this one. victorrocha (talk) 17:31, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I have done some cleaning up, the large scale differemce in colour are proving difficult to adjust, but i have gone through the image and removed some of the smaller issues. Sedd&sigma;n talk Editor Review 18:46, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Support Edit 1 Nicely done edit. Personally I enjoy the lighting it gives more scale to the size of the mountain in a 2D image. victorrocha (talk) 18:52, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Edit 1 Highly encyclopedic. Durova Charge! 21:01, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Support I like the first version better than Edit 1, but I'm fine with Edit 1 if that is what others select. --Blechnic (talk) 19:12, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Support edit one Good image. Spencer  T♦C 19:27, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

MER-C 05:56, 25 June 2008 (UTC)