Wikipedia:Picture peer review/MetLifeBuilding

MetLife Building


Striking features of this photo include the sky color, complimentary cloud patterns, excellent composition and color balance, and long depth of field. The composition is such that the unusual shape of the building and its proximity to Grand Central Terminal are clearly portrayed. The long depth of field shows details from the very top of the building (including the logo) and details from the Grand Central Terminal facade are in excellent focus and especially sharp. Furthermore, this photo is included in the MetLife Building article and helps the reader visualize the proximity of the building with Grand Central Terminal, as discussed in the article.


 * Creator:Jnn13


 * Nominated by: Jnn13 (talk) 15:59, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments:
 * Great photo (and a surprisingly old one, given its high quality). I'm concerned it may work better artistically than encyclopedically however.  The Met Life building is cut off on the side and bottom, and little of Grand Central is visible. I note the skyscraper has two levels -- I don't know what to call them -- where the facade is indented and large supporting columns are visible. This is an important architectural element but only one of them is visible in this picture.  Yes, I realize it's New York City and a challenging place to photograph, but we do have other pictures in the article that give nearly a top to bottom look of the Met Life Building.  It is a compelling picture, I grant you that, but given that it's such a prominent, commonly photographed location, I would expect folks on FPC to be very demanding.  I wouldn't rule out a nomination though, if you are confident about it. Fletcher (talk) 03:28, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the fair feedback. My initial reaction was that this photo would pique a viewer's curiosity and compel the viewer to read the article ("...being eye-catching to the point where users will want to read its accompanying article." - as per Featured picture candidates.  I don't know enough about the architectural significance of elements in the photo to argue either way.  Thanks for the great review!  Jnn13 (talk) 04:58, 5 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree with Fletcher. It is an artistic and visually appealing photo; kudos on your work. But I don't really see it passing FPC because of its artistic nature (the angle it's taken at, for one). I'm unsure if you live in NYC or will be visiting again in the future, but the article lacks a full shot of the building from Park Ave. A shot that includes Grand Central and the full building (best done if you stitch a couple zoomed shots together rather than taken one shot zoomed out) would easily become the main image of the page and would be something to put up at FPC. I'd even be willing to stitch the images if you don't have any software to do that. Also, I'm not a Commons FPC regular, but they do judge images on artistic merit. Maybe a trip over there is in order? ~  ωαdεstεr 16  «talkstalk» 16:54, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks - already in the Commons. A shot of the whole building is especially tough, since the bottom portion (which is actually rectangular, not octagonal like the upper tower) is surrounded by tall buildings on all sides.  I had not thought of stitching together a couple of shots - I will try that out next time the clouds remotely mirror the photo!  Saw your photos, BTW - nice.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jnn13 (talk • contribs) 03:03, 13 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not an artist, I don't take the best pictures (I submitted one captured by a cell phone above this), but I do know this. That image is very well taken, the angle is impeccable, and like any good image, you want to take a good look before scrolling onward. I especially like that fancy building (Grand Central Station) in the foreground, with its detailed little statues... it adds fantastic contrast to the sleek, modern MetLife building in the background. In fact, the Grand Central Station almost throws in an old-world charm. These are within miles from each other, old meets new, ect. It is a very appealing photograph, and is quite enjoyable to look at. In short, it's one heck of an imag! Great job! I commend whoever took it --TurtleShroom! :) †Jesus Loves You and Died for you!† 18:28, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Seconder:

