Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Schwäbisch Hall in winter.jpg

Schwäbisch Hall in winter
Voting period ends on 8 Apr 2015  at 16:11:04 (UTC)
 * Reason:scenic photo of Schwäbisch Hall for Christmas/New year holidays
 * Articles in which this image appears:Schwäbisch Hall, Christmas lights
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Places/Landscapes
 * Creator:Petar Milošević


 * Support as nominator – PetarM (talk) 16:11, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Support this is a wonderful example of night photography, clear and crisp with fine detail. -- talk→  WPPilot   04:07, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - Technically a great shot. Composition feels a bit cramped to me. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:05, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Oppose The building is partially obscured by the tree - a picture taken further to the right giving a front-on view would be much better. It would also demonstrate clearer the subject, as potentially it could be about any of the buildings in the picture - none of them are front and centred. Technically good, but not good enough EV wise for me gaz hiley  16:43, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
 * The subject is the Marktplatz (presumably the town's central square), not one specific building. ("Schwäbisch Hall" is a town, not a building; not sure if there is any confusion there...) 86.155.201.128 (talk) 13:57, 31 March 2015 (UTC)


 * OpposeThe cropping of the aerials is a level of editing I'm not really happy with. Resulting image is still rather cramped and the camera is struggling with the varying light levels (the lights blending together on the center far left and on the building just to the right of the town hall). Might be worth trying to shoot at ISO200 (E-P5 native iso) in future. You are sacrificing dynamic range by jumping to 320. Otherwise shoot in raw and mess with the curves in post or its time to break out the HDR (with care).©Geni (talk) 07:53, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but I think these objections about the lighting are ridiculous. (Can't see any cropping of aerials either.) 86.155.201.128 (talk) 11:13, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I would also disagree with the objections raised above. please use a account to register your comments, its much more helpful but I have to agree with you here.  talk→   WPPilot   16:35, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Check the historical uploads the antennas were edited shorter in the last upload.©Geni (talk) 12:40, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment @©Geni, Antenna was shortened due to remarks by some, but not by croping. Image isnt downsized. Photo is almost at full size - 96 %. ISO 320 vs ISO 200 wouldnt be resolved by your eyes and sky noise was deleveled for beeing better. No use of HDR at such scene, everything is perfect enligthed as it should be. --PetarM (talk) 20:11, 31 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Support - that's a Christmas tree, and it is winter. Hafspajen (talk) 11:22, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Support – Per WPPilot. Sca (talk) 15:58, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Support - Wonderful example of night photography, very nice.--Soundwaweserb (talk) 12:40, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Support - I can't find anything bad and the tree do not pose any serious threat for the picture. -The Herald the joy of the LORD my strength 08:37, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Support: no objections. Fylbecatulous talk 14:01, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

--Armbrust The Homunculus 17:01, 8 April 2015 (UTC)