Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/SydneyHarbourBridgeandOperaHouse IB.jpg

Sydney Harbour Bridge and Opera House[edit]

Self-nom. I took this myself and just love the bridges perspective and the framing of the opera house in the background. - Ian 03:34, 3 May 2005 (UTC) Illustrates Sydney Harbour Bridge. --Andrew 12:42, May 3, 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nominate and support. - Ian 03:34, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. -- Solipsist 07:12, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ Hate to say it because it is a pretty good image, but although the middle of the image looks good, for some reason the sides look extremely compressed (the boat in the bottom right corner, the top left hand part of the bridge for examples). Will change to support if these can be fixed. Another small thing is the license. It's good that although its copyrighted that the it is ok to copy it for any purpose, but if it were to be released under the GFDL or even PD, it would be less confusing. Sydney Harbour Bridge--Fir0002 09:33, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have just added {{NoRightsReserved}}, a less-confusing but equivalent license; if the author wants to switch, that might help. --Andrew 13:04, May 3, 2005 (UTC)

License changed (it's all very confusing to us earthlings).

I don't really understand what you mean by the sides looking compressed. It hasn't been touched up at all - it's straight out of the camera. Ian 14:11, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

To see what I'm reffering too, you have to be looking at the full res photo. If you look in the top left hand corner of the picture, the bridge looks smudged. The same type of thing occurs in the bottom left hand corner the littel ship is bloctchy as is the water. But I'll change my vote to Neutral as the auto resized version looks great. --Fir0002 22:18, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. I do see it now, but I can't explain it. Must be my cheap camera. (?) - Ian 23:42, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Nice picture, fills a niche in the article. This license, although confusingly worded, is functionally identical to being in the public domain; it does not appear to be possible to release material into the public domain. --Andrew 12:51, May 3, 2005 (UTC)
No clear concensus - moving back to voting for another couple of days. -- Solipsist 05:31, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose- has no one noticed the buildings are leaning, not something to be tolerated in an FPC (in my opinion) - Adrian Pingstone 07:06, 22 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There are perspective issues here (the buildings on the left and right slope in opposite directions) but also the water was not flat. I've rotated the image slightly so hopefully both problems will appear less severe. L upin 16:35, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted +3 / -1 / 1 neutral -- Solipsist 06:04, 27 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]