Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Indus Valley near Leh - alternate.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 May 2015 at 23:37:47 (UTC)
- Reason
- New version uploaded for the original
- Articles this image appears in
- Indus River
- Previous nomination/s
- Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Indus River
- Nominator
- KennyOMG (talk)
- Delist and Replace — KennyOMG (talk) 23:37, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Keep - I fail to see what's wrong with this image. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:45, 14 May 2015 (UTC)Keep -- No reason to delist. Yann (talk) 20:10, 16 May 2015 (UTC)- Comment - I have replaced the original with one that has better resolution, color balance, tones, I think the geometric distortion is a bit better handled, and while I appreciate Bammesk's work his edit made the Alt worse than the original in quite a few respects (like noise and, ironically, unbalanced tones). KennyOMG (talk) 02:11, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
- From a purely procedural point, you should have both here so that we can easily compare them (since you're proposing a replacement, not having the replacement here is a problem). Second, the horizon in the current FP appears straighter, and the contrast is a bit better. Yes, admittedly there are points where the whites are blown out, but there should be a midpoint between blown highlights and little contrast. The extra resolution is really useful, and if the two issues I pointed out were addressed, I'd be fine with a D&R. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 05:35, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
- How can I link the other version here? :) Also the horizon is straight in the new one, not the old one (it's tricky picture and you only _feel_ that way because you're comparing two and the base of the hills tilt less in the old one). KennyOMG (talk) 00:01, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
- Nevermind got it. Also I think it's not the best to make decisions based on 2x 250px wide images (or even 1920 wide, for that matter!) since the first thing lost during downsampling are the highlights, so every dark area will look darker. Take a look at the mountains on the right at 100% and tell me which one looks better. Take a look at the lower-right "gravel" and tell me which one is lighter. Take a look at the whole image and tell me which one looks more natrural.
- I was comparing the full resolution images. Also, the blown highlights were mentioned as a shortcoming in the current FP (your new edit handles highlights better) — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:02, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
- Nevermind got it. Also I think it's not the best to make decisions based on 2x 250px wide images (or even 1920 wide, for that matter!) since the first thing lost during downsampling are the highlights, so every dark area will look darker. Take a look at the mountains on the right at 100% and tell me which one looks better. Take a look at the lower-right "gravel" and tell me which one is lighter. Take a look at the whole image and tell me which one looks more natrural.
- How can I link the other version here? :) Also the horizon is straight in the new one, not the old one (it's tricky picture and you only _feel_ that way because you're comparing two and the base of the hills tilt less in the old one). KennyOMG (talk) 00:01, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
- From a purely procedural point, you should have both here so that we can easily compare them (since you're proposing a replacement, not having the replacement here is a problem). Second, the horizon in the current FP appears straighter, and the contrast is a bit better. Yes, admittedly there are points where the whites are blown out, but there should be a midpoint between blown highlights and little contrast. The extra resolution is really useful, and if the two issues I pointed out were addressed, I'd be fine with a D&R. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 05:35, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
- Delist and Replace — Now I agree that the new version is better. Yann (talk) 06:31, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
- D&R - Reconsidering it, the extra pixels give this new version an edge. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:00, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
- Delist and Replace - New upload has higher quality. Bammesk (talk) 00:44, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
- D&R as we need better images. Think of future. 1500X1500 will stand for a year or two when we will need higher requirements. -The Herald (Benison) • the joy of the LORDmy strength 06:29, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Replaced with File:Indus Valley near Leh.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 01:05, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
