Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/South Pole

I'm amused with the discussion of the aerial picture of the new Elevated Station at South Pole. I took the picture around January 25 2005 at the request of the National Science Foundation. This is something done twice a year, once in October or early November and again in late January for the purpose of documenting the drifted snow and changes made to the station. This particular photo was one of nearly 500 taken during this aerial mission. It was the first or second time I have ever done this type of photography. All photos were taken from the right front seat of a Twin Otter and little time was available to set up the shot. It was taken at 500 ft elevation in a plane traveling at about 100 knots. I'm sure my collection included other shots at higher elevation with more of the station including the old structures, but this particular shot was intended only to capture an image of the Elevated Station structure from the back side of the station. I'm assuming this is a draft image I developed as a smaller size JPG. It's likely that there are better and more recent images available from the National Science Foundation. All my pictures during this mission were taken with a Nikon D100 or Canon Mark IID in Raw format.

I personally like the image, but do agree that its appeal is limited. The image was intended to be for archival purposes V/s artistic representation of the South Pole. The National Science Foundation is the owner of the images. As part of the privilege for flying the mission we, the photographers, sign the rights of the photos over to the NSF.

About the orientation of the geographical and the ceremonial; once a year, on January 1st, we add a new geographical pole marker approximately 10 meters (point is established yearly by surveyors from the USGS) from the one set the previous year. We relocate the ceremonial pole and flags every two or three years to keep the walking distance to the geographical pole to a minimum.

Bill Henriksen, former Winter Manager South Pole Station —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bill Henriksen (talk • contribs) 20:32, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station, viewed from above

 * Reason:Really helps illustrate the geography of the research station and its relative position vis-a-vis the actual South Pole. This image could probably benefit from a little downsampling and perhaps some tilt correction.
 * Proposed caption:The Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station, a U.S. research station near the South Pole in Antarctica. The new buildings are built on stilts to protect them from snow buildup; older buildings seen on the right are gradually being buried.  The geographic South Pole and the ceremonial pole can both be seen in the background just above the building, slightly to the left of center, below the tracks behind the buildings.  The ceremonial pole, used for photo opportunities, is near an arc of international flags; the actual geographic pole, marked by a pole, a white rectangular sign and a solitary United States flag, is a few more meters to the left.  The ice sheet on which all of these are located moves at a rate of about 10 meters per year, carrying the structures with it; the position marker of the geographic South Pole is repositioned each year on New Year’s Day to compensate for the movement of the ice.
 * Articles this image appears in:South Pole, Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station
 * Creator:Bill Henriksen, National Science Foundation


 * Support as nominator Spikebrennan 22:10, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment You said "Creator:User:Rebroad was the uploader". So here is my question: is User:Rebroad both uploader and creator of the image, or the image was created by somebody else? Maybe I'm missing something. I could not find this information in the image description. Thank you.--Mbz1 23:06, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * It does say that in the image description... thegreen J      Are you green?  23:09, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Say what? Could you, please copy and paste here excactly what is says. Thank you.--Mbz1 23:16, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * "Original upload log/(All user names refer to en.wikipedia)/2006-03-09 16:46 Rebroad 2756×2000×8 (4188033 bytes)" and "its author, Rebroad" thegreen J      Are you green?  23:47, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The "its author, Rebroad" bit is up in the licensing section in the copyright free box (I had trouble finding this too). --jjron 07:51, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I don't think that the tilt or too much else should be changed in this photograph. I was taken by how the camera that took this photograph was at a greater angle than the sun.  I went on a search for other aerial photographs with this same configuration and I got bored in Austria (if you try to find one, alphabetical might not be the best way to search).  I think that it is only at the equator (or between the tropics) that there are not places where the sun doesn't shine -- but this place has an unusual amount of such area. -- Carol 03:17, 6 November 2007 (UTC)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by CarolSpears (talk • contribs)
 * Question. Sorry, can anyone clarify the caption (I realise you got it out of the image description Spike, so you may not know either). It says "The actual geographic pole is a few more meters to the left" - OK, a few more metres to the left of the ceremonial pole, or a few more metres to the left of where the photo ends? At a guess, I think it's saying it's out of the photo, and the 'few more metres' part is being a bit generous. (I mean why would you put a ceremonial pole so close to the real pole?) --jjron 08:01, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The ceremonial pole and the real pole are both in the picture: as shown here, they're both above the large building.  The ceremonial pole has an arc of flags around it, the real geographic South Pole is a bit to the left and is marked by a stick with a solo United States flag near it.  (Images in the South Pole article show both landmarks in greater detail.)  I don't know whether "a few more meters" means less than twenty, or more than a hundred.  Note that, per the South Pole article, "The polar ice sheet is moving at a rate of roughly 10 meters per year, so the exact position of the Pole, relative to the ice surface and the buildings constructed on it, gradually shifts over time."  The facility staff do not re-locate the ceremonial pole as it, and the facility, are carried along by the moving ice, but they periodically do adjust the position of the marker of the geographic pole.  Spikebrennan 14:58, 6 November 2007 (UTC)  Caption adjusted; feel free to edit it further.  Spikebrennan 15:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, OK, yep now I can see where it is in the image - looks like about 20 - 30m to me. I wonder what that other post thing is about halfway back to the building (I was wondering for a while whether that was the pole). --jjron 07:09, 7 November 2007 (UTC) (Updated caption with some info from the article - geographic pole is repositioned each New Year's Day). --jjron 07:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I rearranged the caption and corrected one use of geographic to ceremonial for clarity. I'm not sure what the (I guess) snow sculpture is, but the pole denizens are known for killing time with whimsy. --Dhartung | Talk 10:24, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I rearranged the caption and corrected one use of geographic to ceremonial for clarity. I'm not sure what the (I guess) snow sculpture is, but the pole denizens are known for killing time with whimsy. --Dhartung | Talk 10:24, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Weak support as it is an interesting image. It's a shame that the older part of the station is cut off, as the contrast in architecture is significant. The size is just barely adequate, another concern. Are there any alternatives to this one? --Dhartung | Talk 10:24, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose This is one of those where I feel I must be missing something. It's high resolution I suppose, encyclopedic but not exceptionally so, image quality isn't too good, nor are the shot angle and perspective particularly pleasing. Doesn't do it for me, I'm afraid. --mikaultalk 16:38, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

This image appears to be plagiarized from this url. The source URL appears to be public domain, but probably needs more clarification and (definitely) a new license tag. MER-C 02:05, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Good catch. Spikebrennan 17:05, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


 * It is done and now I'd like to Support the amazing image.--Mbz1 12:54, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose, it's a few buildings seen from above, the picture is poorly composed; i can't see why this picture is special or amazing in any way at all. --Aqwis 18:07, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * What is amazing for me in these buildings is the location they were build at. Very few people have seen or will ever see them. The image also shows the design of South Pole station - the most extreme place at the Earth.--Mbz1 13:03, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Poor composition; abruptly cut off on the right and lower left. Debatable enc. v. and lacking in artistic "wow" factor. --Malachirality 03:38, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

MER-C 01:35, 12 November 2007 (UTC)