Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Kremlevskaya Naberezhnaya

Kremlevskaya Naberezhnaya street, Mosocw edit

Kremlin Embankment and Moscow skyline with Cathedral of Christ the Saviour on the left and Kremlin on the right

Modified version

I saw this image on the Moscow article and thought it met FP standards. It was taken by Dmitry Azovtsev.

Nominate and support. —Khoikhoi 22:12, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Hasn't this one been up for FPC in the past? chowells 22:58, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, I just noticed that it has back in January. It is still ok to re-post it? —Khoikhoi 23:01, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Its OK to repost imgaes here, so long as enough time has past by since the last nom. TomStar81 19:50, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. I think a similar image would have potential, but the points of interest you mention (skyline, cathedral, Kremlin) are a bit lost in the haze, while the street and cars in the foreground are much clearer, despite being (relatively) unimportant to the image. The sky is interesting. Maybe another exposure on a day with less haze would work better -- possibly a pano that leaves out most of the highway in the foreground. Also, what was modified in the second version? -- moondigger 23:04, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I don't know if there's a guideline, but I would suggest that a given picture should only be elligible for being candidate for FP every six months. Now, this isn't quite six months, but since this isn't policy and just my gut feeling, it should probably stay. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 08:09, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Agree with moondigger about haze, etc. Also sky at top right is blown right out which is a bit of a concern. Nice suggestion by Dante Alighieri that there should be a time delay on renominations. --jjron 09:35, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I could almost support it, but the composition is just...not there. Sort of a "yeah, but no" image - it has nice elements (the kremlin, the clouds, the sunset, the river), but the overall effect just isn't that great - there's no focal point, the bright sky detracts from the kremlin, the road is too prominent. Sort of the problem of trying to get too much into an image - you end up with nothing at all. Stevage 09:49, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. I like the "vanilla sky" look, however, as other users have pointed out the sky is much too strong for the rest of the photo which looks too dark; this could probably made less evident with some editing however. I also don't mind the blown out sky that much since sometimes it's just impossible to avoid, but the photo isn't very focused among other things. I ultimately agree with Stevage on this one, the photo has some good elements but just barely misses the mark. --Mad Max 04:15, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
NeutralThe Moskva sky is awesome, but the image just isn't sharp enough and the cars are too prominent. Perhaps editing to sharpen and perhaps crop to remove some of the road.--Dakota ~ 17:31, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per last time, taken at the wrong time of day. The architecture is in shadow ~ Veledan • Talk 22:10, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as per Moondigger. --P199 23:44, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. It's a nice shot of Moscow and would probably work during the afternoon, but it was simply taken at the wrong time of day. The sky may add a nice effect, but it's too distracting from the main subject, which is Moscow. The shadow on the buildings also removes a lot of the purpose of the image. It's almost there....just take it 6 hours earlier:P bob rulz 02:06, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted -- moondigger 02:58, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]