User:AlexiusHoratius/Minneapolis

Water-centric

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 (formerly) current

Buildings-centric

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 14

Montage

15

Comments

AlexiusHoratius

(don't take anything personal)

• 1 - decent but could be improved - too much blue or something.
• 2 - nice reflection but buildings obscured
• 3 - decent but maybe too far and too narrow
• 4 - decent but maybe too tall and doesn't look too good at full size (maybe zoom issue...I don't know)
• 5 - too much bridge/river
• 6 - too much lake trees, buildings hardly visible
• 7 - interesting but buildings dark and probably too tall for an infobox
• 8 - decent but a bit dull, could use a crop for an infobox
• 9 - decent but a bit dull
• 10 - intersting but maybe a bit too much so; I've lived in Loring Park for 5 years and I'd have to study the infobox-sized version to tell which city is shown
• 11 - same as 8, some quality issues as well
• 12 - interesting but could be re-done; bit too bright
• 13 - could probably have the sides cropped a bit; looks a bit slanted to me
• 14 - I actually like this but too tall and that motion thing seems like a Chamber of Commerce cliché to get a place to look energized and dynamic.
• 15 - Don't like it - weird choice of buildings, too tall for an infobox

The one on there now is okay too (Minneapolis-Mississippi-20070704) but most of the tall buildings can't be seen. AlexiusHoratius 05:58, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Anndelion

• 4, 6, and 8 seem dull or low-quality.
• 5 and 7 seem far more focused on the water than the skyline -- while that's an important part of the city, certainly, I think these give it undue weight for an infobox pic.
• 1 and 12 are nice, but seems rather dreary.
• 2 has a bit of an overpowering reflection.
• 11 looks good but seems a little bit dull/low-quality.
• 13 is decent but seems washed-out.
• 14 has that wow factor, and I like it as a photo, but it looks overly retouched to me.
• I like 9 and 10.
• 15 is a nice enough montage; do other cities typically use montages in their infoboxes?

The one on there now is very nice as well and incorporates water + buildings. Of course, no offense is meant by any of my comments -- they're for the benefit of the encyclopedia and all. — anndelion ※ 06:59, 6 April 2011 (UTC)