Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Catawissa, Pennsylvania

Catawissa, Pennsylvania edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Dec 2014 at 01:17:01 (UTC)

Original – A view of southern Catawissa, Pennsylvania from the southeast.

Reason: Was recently approved for QI status on Commons, has a resolution of over 3 megapixels. As far as I know, it's the best image that shows a significant portion of the borough of Catawissa. The license is CC-BY-SA 4.0. It has EV by depicting what a large portion of Catawissa looks like. Admittedly, it doesn't show the whole borough, but I think it shows enough to give people the general idea and it has the added bonus of depicting some of the local geography. The fact that this is a picture of Catawissa can be verified by checking the coordinates. An accurate file description is available. No digital manipulation was done except for minor things like sharpness and saturation. In short, I think it checks all the boxes for FP.
Articles in which this image appears: Catawissa, Pennsylvania
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Urban
Creator: Jakec

Support as nominator – --Jakob (talk) 01:17, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Possible to get higher up? Can't really see much of the borough. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:22, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Technically, the image is fine, but as Criso mentioned, the town is pretty much obscured by trees. Compositionally, it's just not featured picture worthy IMO. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 01:53, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Diliff + the large shadow part in the foreground is a no go for a featured photo. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 08:44, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yes, the large shadow it is the main drawback. The foreground should be interesting or just clear. Hafspajen (talk) 15:16, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose — Lacks focal point — no visual 'hook.' Sca (talk) 18:31, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – I agree with Sca about the lack of a focal point and with Diliff regarding the composition. The photo doesn't show enough of the town to make it valuable as an illustration of the town. CorinneSD (talk) 17:13, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Crisco 1492, Diliff, Alchemist-hp, Hafspajen, Sca, and CorinneSD: Is the fact that there probably isn't any publicly accessible spot from which more of the borough could be seen a mitigating factor? --Jakob (talk) 22:37, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Jakec: And how about an aerial view? --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:44, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Jakec: I see that you took the photo, and I guess you'd like a photo to go with the article. I'm not an expert in judging images; the others are, and they said the shadow in the foreground is a problem. If you want a fall scene, maybe next fall you could go back to this same spot and take a photo at a time of day when there would be no shadow, and then re-submit your nomination. Maybe then it would pass. Maybe also you could look around for another vantage point. Just a suggestion. CorinneSD (talk) 23:18, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you've got the money, a drone may be a good investment, if you want to take images of towns. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:48, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have nowhere near the amount of money needed to rent a plane or purchase a drone. --Jakob (talk) 00:05, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pity, because the scenery is very nice, - and we can't crop out that shadow, because the file will be not big enough after the crop. It's only 2,256 × 1,504 pixels, how unfortunate. Hafspajen (talk) 12:24, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's a mitigating factor to be honest. Not every subject can be photographed to a FP standard using regular tools/viewpoints. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 22:22, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 02:24, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]