Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/AlburyRailwayStation

Albury Railway Station [edit]

This picture does illustrate the elments of the Italianate style of architecture clearly. As per the article: Key visual components of this style include: low-pitched or flat roof; large eave brackets under the roof; dramatic cornice structures; windows with one or two panes and heavy surrounds; tall, arched windows with hoods or "eyebrows"; paired windows, arched and curved windows; tall first floor windows; square or rectangular towers; cast-iron railings and facades; two or three stories (rarely one story) ...

As a gallery sized image, it shows clearly in Australian_architectural_styles#Victorian_Period_c._1840_-_c._1890 and typifies Australian architecture of the time. It also illustrates clearly a notable landmark of the city of Albury, New South Wales.

It was really when reviewing the Australian architectural styles page, it struck me how clear it was amongst a sea of gallery pictures. I thought it would be informative for me to get some comments about it from others - in part to help me to learn how to take better pictures. This is my first nomination for Featured picture.--A Y Arktos 00:03, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nominate (self-nomination) and support. - A Y Arktos 00:03, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't see any distractions, and it fits architecural styles⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 02:43, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Not striking, the clouds behind the tower distract, and artefacts (halos) around details. --Janke | Talk 08:24, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support it could be sharper, but I support it anyway. Disagree that the clouds distract.. just natural. drumguy⁸⁸⁰⁰ - speak? 21:41, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Agree with Janke. Alr 23:34, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent pic, nicely illustrating the article - Adrian Pingstone 20:16, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. Nice picture, but not as sharp as it should be for FP status Hein 22:22, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I find the cropping uncomfortable. enochlau (talk) 15:08, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. Flcelloguy (A note?) 16:04, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Feels "crowded", but the bigger "problem" is the sharpness. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 00:10, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: given this is the first time I have sought feedback in this way, could people please clarify what they mean by "artefacts (halos)" and "crowded"? I am not sure how you would illustrate Italianate architecture other than with a "crowded" image. Thank you --A Y Arktos 00:38, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps crowded is not the proper word. I think something about the angle is making me feel as if I'm "too close" to the building. Now, obviously, you're going to want to get close-ups to show the architecture. However, I think that if you were across the street (or at some other location) then you could still have zoomed in to get the details of the architecture without it feeling "cramped". At least, I *think* that's what bothers me about it. :) --Dante Alighieri | Talk 00:36, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The artefacts (halos) I mentioned are seen as a bright border around edges, very visible around the lamp, for instance. This is due to excessive sharpening (usually in the camera's own software), and gets even worse with jpg compression. --Janke | Talk 07:10, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted Raven4x4x 03:35, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]