Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Washington Monument at Dusk

Washington Monument[edit]

.

A picture of a famous monument, against a beautiful sky. ~~I do not know who the photogragher is, as he only says it is "myself".~~ It was taken by Diliff. Apears in Washington Monument.

Nominate and Support. | AndonicO 14:33, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support. Absolutely stunning quality, and very encyclopedic. By the way, it's taken by Diliff. NauticaShades^(talk) 15:11, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Ah, yes, the master of photograghy; I suspected it was he. | AndonicO 15:48, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, blurry at full res. It's very nice, but we can do better. The lines of the blocks that make up the monument are very blurred when I look at it full size. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 18:25, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice photo, but kind of boring to me. Unlike the Capitol or Big Ben architectural images, the detail visible at high res isn't all that interesting to me. Debivort 19:04, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, the sky seems way to dark at the top - is that a polarization effect? Debivort 19:05, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't know about the polarization, but I think that this is the best possible picture of the Washington Monument. In other words, it would be hard to find a more encyclopedic photograph of it. NauticaShades^(talk) 20:57, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Hypothetica alternatives for the monument that I would consider more interesting could be a photo of it during construction showing building techniques of the time, or a diagram showing its interior design. Or a DC panorama taken from its observation deck. That said, of its exterior, this photo is about as good as I could imagine. Debivort 22:10, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Not a polarization effect, just the twilight ambience. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 22:02, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support The motion of the flags is the only part that appears blurry to me and that's not enough for me to oppose. The light-colored rock of the monument looks just amazing against the dark blue sky. If only my computer monitor were vertical, this would be my wallpaper in an instant. --Nebular110 20:53, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Answer Debivort. It's true that under construction it would be more encyclopedic, but this (IMHO) is more impressive. A panorama would also be nice. | AndonicO 22:39, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Great architectural photograph. Good lighting too - doniv 15:00, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I think the overall sharpness makes up for the slight blur mentioned by Night Gyr (though I am on the verge of weak supporting because of that). --Tewy 21:02, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Answer Nebular110. I believe I know what you mean about the vertical monitor, but, in Windows XP anyways, there is a way around it. You have to right click the image, and select "set as wallpaper", which would leave to your problem. To fix this, you have to go to your Desktop, and right click there. Select "Properties", and clik the tab that says "Desktop". You should see a box that says either "center", "tile", or "stretch". Select center, and click OK. This should fix your problem, unless I am confused and you meant something else. | AndonicO 00:59, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I thought they meant if only the actual monitor were shaped in a portrait format rather than a landscape format (otherwise you get that ugly solid color to the sides). --Tewy 01:12, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - It doesn't look so bad in black. I already have it on. | AndonicO 10:08, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yeah, I realize that I could just center the image but then I get that somewhat annoying solid color background. Andonic is right though, this one still looks pretty good with a dark blue or black background --Nebular110 14:52, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Agree with above. Also the sky seems to suffer from either posterization or jpeg compression. -Fir0002 08:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The colorful contrast between the monument and the sky more than makes up for the blurry flags at the base. I don't notice any compression artifacts. --S0uj1r0 10:50, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Great composition and timing. --Dschwen 09:43, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support dull building, good photo HighInBC 22:45, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Washington Monument Dusk Jan 2006.jpg --Fir0002 00:03, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]