Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bryce Canyon Hoodoos

Reason: I think it is a good close-up picture of hoodoos.
Articles this image appears in: Hoodoo (geology) and Bryce Canyon National Park
Creator: Digon3

Support as nominator — Digon3 00:25, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's a good picture, but there are more impressive ones at Hoodoo (geology). One problem with this shot is the edge between the shadowed cliff on the left and the sky; it's got some kind of edge artifact. Enuja 05:34, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
minor support nice pic ;-) --Penubag 08:13, 13 April 2007 (UTC)penubag[reply]
Oppose Over-sharpened - note 2-pixel halo around contrasty edges. --Janke | Talk 09:59, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This photo has not been edited. --Digon3 13:44, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose It certainly looks over-sharpened; the older Canon compacts are usually quite soft around high contrast margins but they do show a lot of colour fringeing, which seems greatly exaggerated here. To be fair, you are asking a lot of this sort of camera to deliver the detail people expect here. It could use a fairly heavy left/top crop and I'd still want to see more of the scene off the bottom of the frame, I think. Not a bad-looking pic though. mikaul^talk 15:31, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think you are right about the compacts are usually quite soft around high contrast margins but they do show a lot of colour fringeing. The same thing happened here Image:Bryce Canyon Hoodoos 4 edit.JPG
Oppose - Not sharp enough for a photo of a static subject like this; the composition and lighting aren't bad but there's a lot of fringing and not much detail. As others have said, you're really going to struggle to get a featured picture out of this camera; you might manage if you can make a many-image mosaic and downsample heavily, but it's a lot of work and far from guaranteed to give good results. --YFB ¿ 00:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 04:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]