Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Skagafjörður

Skagafjörður valley

 * Reason:One of my favorite photos from my recent trip to Iceland. Captures the mood of this place very well with low angle high saturation arctic lighting, hanging valleys, and nice topographic relief provided by the partial snow covering. Shows most of the "town" of Varmahlið, and lots of the fjord. 5-part pano, if I recall, stitched by hand, downsampled for sharpness. Self-nom.
 * Articles this image appears in:Skagafjörður Varmahlíð
 * Creator:User:Debivort


 * Support as nominator de Bivort 21:01, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Oppose The fence in the LHS is quite distracting and looks like you could have got a better vantage point from on top of the rocks on LHS --Fir0002 10:11, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Well fine - I disagree though - this vantage was chosen to put some silhouetted detail in the FG. I wonder if anyone else is going to comment... de Bivort 17:25, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * OK since you ask, here's my comment: If it weren't for the fence, I might support. Now I'm neutral ;-) --Janke | Talk 16:57, 19 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Weak Oppose It's OK but rather conventional - nothing about it really grabs me by the throat. Excalibur (talk) 22:17, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Hehe maybe conventional for those living in the heathlands - but less so for us not living in glaciated valleys. Cheers though.. de Bivort 22:40, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Neutral —αἰτίας •'discussion'• 11:45, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak to Moderate Support Very nice image, but you really have to zoom in to see any details. Juliancolton (Talk) 14:49, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * "have to zoom in to see details?" Isn't that the way details normally are in high res images? Ugh .... this nom makes me want to take a wiki break. de Bivort 17:02, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It's nothing personal. It's just that when viewed as a thumbnail, it is hard to see specific things. It is a very nice image, how ever, and you should keep trying. Juliancolton (Talk) 17:04, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Right. this is typical of panos. And why we are asked to evaluate images at their full rez. But thanks for the opinion. de Bivort 17:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Support Let's try to get things started here. It's a high quality picture of an interesting mountain range, and I have no problems with the issues others have raised. And as far as complaining because you have to zoom in to see details? Come on. Give me a break. you're supposed to have to zoom in to see the detail on a panorama. Clegs (talk) 19:04, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I understand, and that is why I gave it a moderate support :) Juliancolton (Talk) 20:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

MER-C 07:32, 24 February 2008 (UTC)