Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Basel Bahnhof

Basel Bahnhof[edit]

Reason: A very sharp panoramic and one of the ones I am more proud of from a stitching perspective. The scene was very wide and keeping straight lines straight was tricky along with avoiding stitching errors in the overhead wires and avoiding duplicates and partials of the people walking around. That and keeping the tram in the image which adds ENC value IMO. Anyway, very informative as well as being large.
Articles this image appears in: Basel, Rail transport in Switzerland
Creator: User:Fcb981

Support as nominator --Fcb981(talk:contribs) 05:10, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My initial impulse was to oppose based on the noise from the overhead wires, but it's clear they're part of both the scene and the city. A question, though; I don't look at many panoramas, but the man on the far right and the woman on the far left look much more flattened than they should. Is this common and/or fixable? --Golbez (talk) 06:51, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- What I think you may be referring too is the aliasing on the overhead wires. Certainly not noise, that is fairly correctable and admittedly I wasn't looking for it nor did I notice it. Due to the fairly intense perspective of the panorama it is either correctly proportioned people and wavy building lines or straight building lines and stretched people. There isn't any way around it. -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 15:08, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - By "noise" I meant nothing so technical, I just meant they jumbled and detracted from the image, but then my brain realized they were fundamental to it. --Golbez (talk) 16:04, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Excessive noise, distracting foreground that detracts from the image, distortion. Looks like a 'no-go'.
Elucidate ^{(parlez à moi)} _{Ici pour humor} 07:58, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Are you talking about aliasing on the wires or something else when you say noise. There should be almost no perceivable noise considering it was taken in daylight, noise reduced then downsampled from 13000 px. As for distortion, yeah, the scene demands it. I could stitch cylindrical but then the train station would look like it was melting. -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 15:08, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is such a nice variety of people in that picture: from the lady taking a bite off her snack and the people waiting for the tram on the left through the guys eyeing another guy in the middle to the Middle Eastern-looking men in the right; all that makes a lovely picture. However, besides the issues outlined above, there's something terribly wrong with the green bus on the right: it's some kind of big editing error. Not sure what caused it exactly, possibly movement, but it's been overlooked. Overall, it's a great and very informative image, but there's apparent distortion on the sides, which doesn't help. I'll abstain from opposing or supporting for now, but I'm leading towards oppose. Todor →Bozhinov 12:56, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I am not a fan of this projection method for a panorama that is centrally depicting a building. It results in a bowed building which lowers the enc value dramatically for me. Also, I think a better time of day or a more cloudy day maybe could be chosen that doesn't have the face of the building in deep shadow. Mfield (talk) 18:26, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per stitching errors (mainly the green bus). I don't necessarily mind the bowing of the building because of the perspective... but when you use this style you have to take more effort to avoid people in the foreground because they look very distorted... still, this is a great picture... I'd mark it as a quality image... just not faultless like FPs should be. gren グレン 19:20, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 05:54, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]