Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Vernal Falls

Support as nominator — Bobmilkman 05:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
oppose - tilted, no detail in blown water. Debivort 07:49, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - blown highlights in water, out of focus, blurry yet over-sharpened giving colour fringing. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξ φ 09:35, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
oppose per above. The rapids are a single mass of blown highlight. --Bridgecross 13:21, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
oppose per above. Walter Siegmund (talk) 20:57, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above. ^8thstar 22:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very similar to this nomination, but with blown highlights and lots of noise. Jumping cheese ^Cont@ct 05:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Im not very technical when it comes to photo's so i dont know the terminology but i'd say the water is too bright and the picture is quite grainy --Childzy ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 21:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The rainbow's quite nice, but the water is overexposed. If you have a raw file, you can try to convert it to jpeg using a darker setting, or use other techniques to get some texture in the water. Fg2 11:54, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 04:36, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]