Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Sunset on Everest

Sunset on Mt. Everest

 * Reason:beautiful picture. Great encyclopedic value too
 * Articles this image appears in:Mt. Everest
 * Creator:Commons user Thomas.fanghaenel


 * Support as nominator Σαι  ( Talk ) 11:33, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose Too noisy - 1/640s is too short an exposure for a shot like this. Time3000 (talk) 15:58, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, I looked at the EXIF data externally and the exposure appears to be 1 second at ISO 800. Its the high ISO that caused the noise, not the shutter speed. That said, you could have got a similar shot with an 8 second exposure and ISO 100, or something similar. I've uploaded a new version with noise reduction. I couldn't see any noticable depreciation in detail so I've overwritten the original for simplicity. Diliff  | (Talk)   (Contribs) 13:30, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I've checked the EXIF data with several different pieces of software and they all give the exposure as 1/640 - not to mention that even something with this low a light level would probably be overexposed at f5.6 and ISO 800 for 1s. Anyway, the exposure is irrelevent, it's the amount of noise that counts.  The noise reduction has improved it, but I'll stand by my oppose for the noise-corrected version though: it's a nice picture, but most of the landscape is too dark to count as encyclopedic, and any attempt to improve that just washes out the light on the top of the mountain. Time3000 (talk) 19:16, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yep you're right, I checked with a different program and it is 1/640. I suppose owning a nice camera (Canon 5D) doesn't mean you have the brains to use the right exposure settings. :-) In this case, they could have used ISO 200 and 1/160th of second handheld, easily. Or ISO 100 and 1/80th if the lens was optically stabilized. Diliff  | (Talk)   (Contribs) 00:56, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments, guys. I just found out that this picture I uploaded more than a year ago has meanwhile drawn some attention.  And I actually feel honored by that fact.  I deliberately uploaded it without doing any improvements (other than cropping it), cuz you would have found out anyway...  I'll try to do better next time, I promise. :-)  Bummer that I missed out on that very special moment. Thomas.fanghaenel
 * Oppose per Time3000. Also note a dirty spot in top right conner - Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 16:05, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose Underexposed, grainy. TheOtherSiguy (talk) 00:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose Main reason is that it makes the world's highest mountain look lower than the vantage point. Motmit (talk) 14:21, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose exposre too short. Spencer  T♦C 17:20, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

. --John254 00:11, 5 April 2008 (UTC)