Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Great Mosque of Central Java
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Jul 2014 at 05:48:52 (UTC)
- Reason
- Well, we've got a church down there, and a Chinese temple... I don't think I've nominated a mosque yet! I had a hell of a time taking this. After failing to take a decent image from the viewing level (owing to a concrete skirt around it, which got in the way) I went to the (closed) 18th floor to try and take an image through the glass, but it was so dirty that it didn't work. I tried to take an image from the very top of the tower, standing next to the lightning rod. No good, still stone blocking the photograph. Finally I ended up going back to the viewing level, standing on a stool, and sticking my camera out of the tower, through the bars, to get the whole darned thing in view. The results, however, are pleasing (at least to me). This appears to be the best aerial view of the mosque online in terms of composition (we have the dome, the three buildings, and even most of the the courtyard), and resolution is certainly not lacking either!
- Articles in which this image appears
- Great Mosque of Central Java
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
- Creator
- Chris Woodrich
- Support as nominator – — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:48, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- Strong support A no brainer. A beautiful, breathtaking and thorough view of the subject (and its surrounding environment), and a very good technical achievement despite a few slightly misfocused source pictures. - Blieusong (talk) 08:45, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks Benh. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:50, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- Support Yann (talk) 12:14, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- Support Hafspajen (talk) 14:55, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- Support Coat of Many Colours (talk) 15:42, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- Support. An interesting view and extremely high resolution image. One question though: Could you not correct the verticals? It's just as nice/useful for views looking down as it is for views looking up. I wonder if it might introduce too much distortion at the bottom though. Just wondering if you tried it though, even a partial correction would be worth a try. Perhaps upload it as an alternative? Ðiliff «» (Talk) 16:59, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- I did try, but I couldn't get anything I would accept (needs a fair bit of rotation, which means the horizon ends up a little wonky). As I didn't save that "experiment", I'll try again to see if I can upload an alt. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:38, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- And that's a no go... even after going back to the source panorama (which has some room for changes), the necessary rotations leave a lot of dead space which one would have to fill in digitally. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:44, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- Ok, no problem. It's still great as-is. I know the feeling, you only get one chance under difficult circumstances and then find that you haven't left much room for adjustments. Sometimes (as per the Temple Church nom), I wish I'd shot just a bit wider. It's hard to visualise the stitched composition when you're shooting. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 09:38, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
- Preachin' to the choir. I'd love to retake the interior at Gedangan from a little bit further back, or Pendem Temple (no article yet) without missing that one frame. Maybe some day... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:47, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
- Ok, no problem. It's still great as-is. I know the feeling, you only get one chance under difficult circumstances and then find that you haven't left much room for adjustments. Sometimes (as per the Temple Church nom), I wish I'd shot just a bit wider. It's hard to visualise the stitched composition when you're shooting. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 09:38, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
- And that's a no go... even after going back to the source panorama (which has some room for changes), the necessary rotations leave a lot of dead space which one would have to fill in digitally. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:44, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- I did try, but I couldn't get anything I would accept (needs a fair bit of rotation, which means the horizon ends up a little wonky). As I didn't save that "experiment", I'll try again to see if I can upload an alt. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:38, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- Support One word - amazing! Angle makes the mosque look big. Seems like a tourism commercial/ad. ///EuroCarGT 19:35, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- (Well, it is pretty darn big. 15k worshipers isn't a figure to sneeze at. Those six umbrellas are each something like 20 or 30 feet tall. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:31, 6 July 2014 (UTC))
- Well I'll be damned. The Indonesian Wikipedia gives 20 metres (66 ft) for each umbrella (sadly unreferenced). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:50, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
- (Well, it is pretty darn big. 15k worshipers isn't a figure to sneeze at. Those six umbrellas are each something like 20 or 30 feet tall. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:31, 6 July 2014 (UTC))
- Support Great shot.--Godot13 (talk) 23:28, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- Support It is a great shot.--talk→ WPPilot 06:08, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
- Support! Jee 17:13, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Promoted File:Great Mosque of Central Java, aerial view.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 06:30, 15 July 2014 (UTC)