Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Westertoren

Westertoren, Amsterdam

 * Reason:The quality is there. I'm not certain, if you'll agree with me on the EV. The picture doesn't fully depicts the tower, as the base is missing. This somewhat limits the EV. The reason for not depicting the whole tower is, because otherwise the base would be obscured by trees and other sorts of objects. This would only reduce the esthetics of the image, without adding valuable information to it. I personally also think, that the tower look better isolated against the sky. To compensate this loss, I've made a close-up with a whole lot of detail. As for you who think: "Why didn't he just made a shot of the tower and the church?" It is impossible to get them both in one picture and a FP of the church itself is impossible (no good viewing point available). The tower is tilted and this image accurately depicts this tilt. I was somewhat surprised to find, that this tower doesn't has its own article. Over here the tower is often seen as an entity of its own, because it's among others made famous through songs, paintings, etc..
 * Articles this image appears in:Amsterdam and Westerkerk
 * Creator:Massimo Catarinella


 * Support as nominator --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 22:12, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. Any reason you chose not to center the tower in the frame? Kaldari (talk) 23:14, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I personally think it improves the composition. --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 23:29, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks kinda awkward. --Muhammad (talk) 02:47, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I have to agree. I think it would look much better centered. Kaldari (talk) 18:57, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I've uploaded a different crop. The tower is now centered in the frame. --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 20:54, 24 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose until the tilt is removed (or is that tower leaning IRL?), and the awkward (I second Muhammad here) composition is changed. Some subjects just work better centered (like symmetric ones for example). --Dschwen 21:09, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I uploaded a new version with the tower centered ten minutes ago.... As for the tilt..as I said in the above text, it is accurate. How do I know this: 1. I've made this picture with a tripod containing a water bubble from a flat surface. 2. After making the picture, I compared the image on my DSLR with the real tower. 3. After processing it through Photoshop, I compared it with images of the tower available on Google. I know it's an awkward tilt, but it's as it is. --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 21:16, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Support now. Beautiful colors, acceptable resolution (a bit too much downsampling though). A bubble hardly has a precision of more than one degree (has it?). But you are right, on second look it is pretty straight. The perspective (slight side view) threw me off. --Dschwen 21:29, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, on third look, it is crooked. And what's worse it seems to be bent (the top is leaning further than the bottom part). Stitching goof? --Dschwen 21:35, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yep, you're right, it is bent. And this is not a stitching error. I also noticed it when photographing the tower (forgot to mention it in the above section). Seriously, the only explanation I can think of is, that every part of the tower is tilted in its own manner (which I have encountered before in other towers, see Dom Tower of Utrecht) Use the word 'Westertoren' with Google and take a look at the images. The second one is of a decent resolution and also shows this bend. Another way of inspecting the tower is by inserting 'Westertoren' in YouTube and click on the second link. This is a movie from 1934, which also shows the bend (only from a different viewing point). An even better movie is 'Brian & Graham, Amsterdam 2009 (Westertoren)' a few clicks down. Anyhow, I think you get my point ;). --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 23:01, 24 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Support--Avala (talk) 10:17, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Behind the crown appears to be a large line sticking out-is this part of the tower or(as I believe it to be)a handily placed plane trail? Lemon martini (talk) 11:24, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 * That's a flagpole. --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 13:38, 26 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Support. An interesting and well presented view of the tower, bends and leans and all. :-) Diliff  | (Talk)   (Contribs) 10:00, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 02:01, 1 October 2009 (UTC)