Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Mt Herschel, Antarctica, Jan 2006.jpg

Image:Mt Herschel, Antarctica, Jan 2006.jpg, featured

•  Info This photo was created, uploaded and then nominated by Snowwayout 05:33, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Support --Snowwayout 05:33, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Support --Konstable 08:37, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Support -- but I don't see the penguin colony. YolanC 10:22, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

• Its the brown mass in the left foreground (the colour of the mounds of waste material and the little stones collected for nest sites). The tiny black dots are Adelie chicks and the white dots are adults. Mt Herschel is the intended feature. Thanks. Snowwayout 21:37, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

•  Support --Ggonnell 11:58, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Support --ßøuñçêY2K 12:34, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Oppose no element really grabs my attention, the background seems a bit hazy and I'd rather have the horizon higher. --Artefacto 13:33, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Support There are many criteria for judging a photograph. On one side, we have the technical aspects such as exposure, color balance, contrast, etc., etc. On another side we have the aesthetical aspects, composition, color, shape, form, perspective, repetition, balance, etc., etc. On yet another side we have we have symbolic aspects, informative value with regards to events, customs, social value, etc. And we can go on. But this image even though it not meet certain criteria tecnically and aesthetically, the degree of difficulty of obtaining this image is what is relevant. You do not go out your back door and take a picture of Antartica. In cases like this, the definition of a good photo resides in the degree of difficulty in obtaining the image. In this sense, for me, this is a good photograph. --Tomascastelazo 14:57, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Support --Ziga 16:05, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Support - I can't see the penguins either, the resolution isn't quite up to it. But that doesn't really matter, as they're not the subject of the pic - MPF 21:43, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Support -- Fastfood 22:06, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Oppose, Mt. Herschel doesn't look as the subject to me, it's more like hazy background. --che 22:12, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Oppose Very good quality but I don't like the composition because of the low left corner. Sorry. El ComandanteHasta ∞ 19:00, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

• Is this any better? Snowwayout 02:14, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

For me, definitely. (I only pulled up contrast a little bit – I placed it over your version, because it's basically the same. Please revert it if you don't like the effect.) --che 11:24, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Looks good, thanks. Snowwayout 21:43, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure to prefer the edited version, because of its visible JPG artifacts. El ComandanteHasta ∞ 09:29, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Only the original is a FP Candidate, thanks for your comments. Snowwayout 23:29, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

•  Support. Don't change a thing. Cary "Bastique" Bass ^parler _voir 01:07, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

• Okay. Snowwayout 23:29, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

•  Support --Klemen Kocjančič (Pogovor - Quick response) 16:25, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Oppose -- Urban 18:13, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Oppose bad composition, bad light, the beach doesn't contribute to the scenery B.navez 08:32, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Support -- Lycaon 17:35, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Support --Luc Viatour 21:36, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Support --ajvol 20:52, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Oppose — Gnangarra 07:55, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
•  Support -Go West 20:30, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Result: 15  Support, 6  Oppose and 1  Neutral => featured. --Lycaon 10:21, 28 June 2006 (UTC)