Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Oakland City Hall

Oakland City Hall[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2011 at 22:51:12 (UTC)

Reason: high resolution, good EV, nice picture
Articles in which this image appears: Oakland City Hall, List of tallest buildings in Oakland, California
FP category for this image: Architecture
Creator: flickr user Daniel Ramirez

Support as nominator --—Chris!_c/t 22:51, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Sharpness and composition aren't quite up to FP quality, IMVHO. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 10:48, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. (both). Sorry, gotta oppose this one. The light's all wrong - taken at the wrong time of day. The front of the building is in shadow, with the light coming from the side. Looking at Google maps it seems that the front of this building basically faces east, which means it should catch good light at the right time of day (which would not be mid-afternoon in November, when the exif says this was taken). In fact I would say Alt1 is better in terms of both lighting and quality (not up to FP though) and probably should be used in the articles, but proving my point about the angle of the light. (Note: put Alt1 up for viewing). --jjron (talk) 14:20, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The alt image does look better. I didn't even realize it exists. Anyway, I know very little about photography, so if people here says this is not good enough, then it probably is.—Chris!_c/t 21:05, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose both perspective distorted, tight crop. --ka ʁs tn 08:12, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose both - Perspective, not examples of our best work. However, I recommend Alt1 for VIC on Commons. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:08, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 01:32, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]