Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Copysul house.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Copysul house.jpg, not featured
[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2016 at 18:25:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Brazil
Info All by -- The Photographer (talk) 18:25, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
Support INeverCry 19:45, 3 September 2016 (UTC)- Support -- Spurzem (talk) 19:55, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
Question What's a Copysul house? 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:26, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
- On Google street view it looks like a local printing shop. cart-Talk 21:07, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for answer and sorry for my delay --The Photographer (talk) 03:49, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
Comment Also looking at how the house looks at Google street view, it seems like the picture has been retouched, wires and graffiti gone and also the roof(!). While I understand that some of this is necessary I'd like such things to be pointed out in the file description of an FPC. If the house has been significantly renovated since the Google photo, I sincerely apologize for this comment. cart-Talk 06:41, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- Dear W. Carter, thanks for your question. I have always added the geolocation as far as possible in my photos to yourself to observe reality and google street map image have a one month apart and many things can happen in one month as a house remodeling, for example, however, it's not the case, I made alterations in this photo, which I considered not alter the main subject (mural and window), the changes were to remove distracting elements of the main subject, including cables, isolated roof, graffiti on the wall, an unknown dirt and black sign. I sincerely apologize my idea is not to show false images, however, I understand that some changes may not be acceptable. --The Photographer (talk) 17:37, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you or that full explanation. I never thought you intended to be deceiving especially since you always provide a geo tag. It was simply a matter of form for an FPC that changes should be recorded so that every voter can form their own opinion about how to view the image. From a photographic point of view I can very well understand all the changes that were necessary to create a beautiful picture, the encyclopedic standpoint is somewhat different for me. I don't mind if corrected things are movable objects like cars, window displays, garbage, dust, birds, etc or things that could have been avoided if the angle was slightly different, as long as they are not the main object in a picture and only a small percentage of that. So the cables, graffiti and dirt are ok, but to change a gable of a house, that is not what I'd like to see in an FP. I also think the roof gable framed the artwork rather nicely, explaining why it has a triangular shape. Others may think differently and regard only the artwork and the windows. Sorry, but for my part I'll have to
Oppose this. --cart-Talk 18:12, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you or that full explanation. I never thought you intended to be deceiving especially since you always provide a geo tag. It was simply a matter of form for an FPC that changes should be recorded so that every voter can form their own opinion about how to view the image. From a photographic point of view I can very well understand all the changes that were necessary to create a beautiful picture, the encyclopedic standpoint is somewhat different for me. I don't mind if corrected things are movable objects like cars, window displays, garbage, dust, birds, etc or things that could have been avoided if the angle was slightly different, as long as they are not the main object in a picture and only a small percentage of that. So the cables, graffiti and dirt are ok, but to change a gable of a house, that is not what I'd like to see in an FP. I also think the roof gable framed the artwork rather nicely, explaining why it has a triangular shape. Others may think differently and regard only the artwork and the windows. Sorry, but for my part I'll have to
- Comment - The Photographer, I'll look forward to your response to that question before I consider the picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:56, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
Neutral Yes, it's fake. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:15, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- Dear W. Carter, thanks for your question. I have always added the geolocation as far as possible in my photos to yourself to observe reality and google street map image have a one month apart and many things can happen in one month as a house remodeling, for example, however, it's not the case, I made alterations in this photo, which I considered not alter the main subject (mural and window), the changes were to remove distracting elements of the main subject, including cables, isolated roof, graffiti on the wall, an unknown dirt and black sign. I sincerely apologize my idea is not to show false images, however, I understand that some changes may not be acceptable. --The Photographer (talk) 17:37, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:08, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- Support Colourful. --Code (talk) 06:45, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination Thanks for the votes, however, a structural change should not be accepted. --The Photographer (talk) 18:33, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 23:16, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
