Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Jaszczurówka at Winter.jpg

File:Jaszczurówka at Winter.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Dec 2024 at 17:46:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Poland
Info created by Jakub T. Jankiewicz - uploaded by Jakub T. Jankiewicz - nominated by EUPBR -- EUPBR (talk) 17:46, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- EUPBR (talk) 17:46, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow. Great atmosphere Cmao20 (talk) 19:47, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 20:46, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice but too dark IMHO Poco a poco (talk) 22:09, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Underexposed Agree with Poco. Even an atmospheric image needs to offer a little more distinguishable content. The roof and the trees are currently too dark in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:36, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Heavily manipulated image. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:38, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question Frank, this is a very important hint, can you elaborate a bit on the manipulation? Thank you! – Aristeas (talk) 08:25, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The overprocessing (in particular with regard to the colors) makes this look super artificial to me. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 09:45, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your assessment, Frank! It seems the photographer was after a very painterly look … – Aristeas (talk) 16:05, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I hear you. I guess it's more a matter of taste and what the image is being used for. In my opinion, for a piece of art to be hung on the wall, it would be wonderful. But in an encyclopedic context, the heavy-handed processing is just to much. At least for me. Given the artistic merit, I'd be perfectly ok with it being promoted.--Frank Schulenburg (talk) 16:37, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Frank Schulenburg: it has very little post-processing, I only used tonal curves to change the contrast. Everything looks just like it was when I took the picture. Jakub T. Jankiewicz (talk) 13:18, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral I’m torn on this one: on the one hand I am conviced by Frank’s assessment, on the other hand I can’t deny the atmosphere and effect of the result. After looking at other photos of the church it seems not totally unrealistic to me, so I am inclined to regard the editing as within the creative freedom of the photographer. – Aristeas (talk) 16:05, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The image looks natural to me (eventhough it's a bit underexposed in my opinion, hence the weak support) and I honestly think the image was not edited much from what was captured with the camera. In night photography long exposure shots like this one (6sec exposure) often lead to such colors and such light effects -- Giles Laurent (talk) 18:24, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Giles –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:14, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 14:00, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Dark but very nice IMHO -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:02, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support After some reflection and thought, I agree with Giles' evaluation. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:57, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:53, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:13, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Level of detail too low in the dark areas, in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:25, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:03, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Poland