Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/CTA Control Tower 18 and loop junction (2nd nomination)

CTA Control Tower 18 and loop junction edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 29 Jun 2010 at 00:37:01 (UTC)

Original - Chicago Transit Authority control tower 18 guides elevated Chicago 'L' northbound Purple and Brown lines intersecting with westbound Pink and Green lines and the looping Orange line above the Wells and Lake street intersection in the loop. (northwest corner of the loop viewed facing northwest)

Edit 4-perspective correction using hugin (by TonyTheTiger (talk · contribs) with corrections by Dschwen (talk · contribs) and then by TonyTheTiger)

Reason: This is a high EV image. This was previously listed at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/CTA Control Tower 18 and loop junction where supporters were User:Greg L and User:Mcshadypl, and opposers were User:Gazhiley.
Articles in which this image appears: Grand union
Rail transport
Signalling control
Junction (traffic)
The Loop (CTA)
Centralized traffic control
Railroad switch
Level junction
Urban rail transit
Chicago 'L'
Chicago Transit Authority
Orange Line (Chicago Transit Authority)
Brown Line (Chicago Transit Authority)
Green Line (Chicago Transit Authority)
Purple Line (Chicago Transit Authority)
Pink Line (Chicago Transit Authority)
Rapid transit
Public transport
Rail tracks
Infrastructure
Lake Street (Chicago)
Wells Street (Chicago)
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Engineering and technology/Others
Creator: Daniel Schwen (User:Dschwen)

Support as nominator --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:37, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Heh, you'll probably kill me, but I'm of the opinion that the uncorrected one looks better than the corrected ones. Perspective correction isn't always necessary or desirable. Noodle snacks (talk) 03:11, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment The photographer agrees with you.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:25, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Edit 4 (though Edit 3 *looks* good too notwithstanding technical geometric shortcomings). This image has great lighting and interesting curves and angles. It has high artistic value and sufficient EV to merit use on the Main Page for one day. It will capture readers’ attention and no one can find fault with the work product. I really like the way the sunlight plays with the wood’s surface. Greg L (talk) 17:18, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support original, though I think it would help to add to the caption that this is on the northwest corner of the loop. I agree that the cropping and perspective correction aren't really helping; I like having the wider view of the track and buildings. It also means you can see more of the train on the right, rather than it being cropped to the point of irrelevance. Also cropped into irrelevance is the street below, which removes one of the key visual indicators that this is all happening on an elevated track, which is an important aspect of the picture. --Golbez (talk) 21:56, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don’t understand the strategy of presenting five options here. It seems a recipe for not being able to arrive at a consensus. I suggest the nominator chose whichever one seems most promising and advance it as a sole candidate. Greg L (talk) 03:26, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I am not sure how standard it is, but I would elimate the first three alternates and show the original and alternate 4. I think that there remains viewer preference decision making between those two. How is it with these two choices.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:07, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - There we go… much better. Greg L (talk) 20:43, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Edit 4 and ~~Weak support for Original~~ support original. This image has great lighting and interesting curves and angles. It has high artistic value and sufficient EV to merit use on the Main Page for one day. It will capture readers’ attention and no one can find fault with the work product. I really like the way the sunlight plays with the wood’s surface. I prefer the version where straight lines don’t converge towards a vanishing point. Greg L (talk) 20:51, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support original, weak oppose edit. Fumbling with the perspective doesn't really work in this case in my opinion. It is great if it is just a little off of a straight view, but this is perspective should stand as is, giving a better sense of the proportions. --Dschwen 02:13, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support original Per myself/Dschwen. Noodle snacks (talk) 21:14, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support original --Alchemist-hp (talk) 00:47, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:CTA loop junction.jpg --Jujutacular ^T · C 01:08, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]