Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Upper Wentworth Falls
- Reason
- Admittedly, there isn't an article on the waterfall itself (something that should be remedied in the future IMO), but it is a grand and important waterfall in the Blue Mountains region of Australia. The image itself is very high res and sharp, the composition (IMO) is good and probably the best available detailed view of it (an alternative view is available from distant lookout that shows the falls from across the valley, but too far away to get good detail)
- Articles this image appears in
- Wentworth Falls, New South Wales, Wentworth Falls (waterfall) and Blue Mountains (Australia)
- Creator
- User:Diliff
- Support as nominator --Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 17:36, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
- Comment: I'd highly recommend that an article on the waterfall be created. Enc. in Wentworth Falls, New South Wales is pretty low, and enc. in Blue Mountains (Australia) is just okay. SpencerT♦C 19:12, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
- I agree that the enc in the town article is limited, but it illustrates the Blue Mountains just like any other featured waterfall picture illustrates a region or National Park (of which there are a number). Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 09:51, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- PS. I created the article stub as a start. Although it is a large and well visited waterfall in the area, there seems to be surprisingly little information about it on the internet, which means making a good sized article is difficult. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 12:08, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'd take it the other two tiers aren't really possible to get in one shot? Noodle snacks (talk) 13:20, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- Not really, no. As I said, there is a distant viewpoint that has somewhat obscured views of the falls - this shows two of the tiers, but is too far away for a detailed shot like the nom (I didn't even take the 70-200mm for weight/space reasons, let alone your 400mm beast, although there were times when I did regret it) and was more obscured by foreground trees when I was there. This is a good view but I'm assuming it was taken by helicopter/plane, so it is unrealistic to expect that to be replicated... In any case, the intent wasn't to show the falls from a distance - this one is an exposure blended panorama with a focus on detail of the upper falls (the more interesting part of the falls IMO). I think took a photo taken from the distant lookout too though, so I'll upload that too when I get a chance. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 14:10, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- Okay, uploaded the other image and added it to the Wentworth Falls (waterfall) article. It complements the other image IMO but isn't what I'd call FP material. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 22:15, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- Not really, no. As I said, there is a distant viewpoint that has somewhat obscured views of the falls - this shows two of the tiers, but is too far away for a detailed shot like the nom (I didn't even take the 70-200mm for weight/space reasons, let alone your 400mm beast, although there were times when I did regret it) and was more obscured by foreground trees when I was there. This is a good view but I'm assuming it was taken by helicopter/plane, so it is unrealistic to expect that to be replicated... In any case, the intent wasn't to show the falls from a distance - this one is an exposure blended panorama with a focus on detail of the upper falls (the more interesting part of the falls IMO). I think took a photo taken from the distant lookout too though, so I'll upload that too when I get a chance. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 14:10, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'd take it the other two tiers aren't really possible to get in one shot? Noodle snacks (talk) 13:20, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- PS. I created the article stub as a start. Although it is a large and well visited waterfall in the area, there seems to be surprisingly little information about it on the internet, which means making a good sized article is difficult. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 12:08, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- I agree that the enc in the town article is limited, but it illustrates the Blue Mountains just like any other featured waterfall picture illustrates a region or National Park (of which there are a number). Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 09:51, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support. Very nice image, and good enc. in the article. SpencerT♦C 01:53, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support Good Ev --Muhammad(talk) 17:55, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- Weak Oppose I actually think that File:Upper Wentworth Falls, NSW, Australia 2 - Nov 2008.jpg has much more EV. This image feels "cramped" and relatively narrow in scope. Noodle snacks (talk) 08:02, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support - We can have more than one photograph of this beautifully scenic area featured, so I don't agree with NS's objection. The photo itself is stunning. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 08:03, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support per nom and comments above. ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 02:23, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support - Beautiful and good EV. — Jake Wartenberg 19:31, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
- Comment: Is it just me, or does this look way over-sharpened? Maedin\talk 19:54, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
- In my opinion, it isn't oversharpened at all. It is sharp, yes, as it has been downsampled quite a bit, but don't confuse this for being oversharpened, in which there are typically haloes around areas of contrast. Do you see any? I've had a good look and I don't... Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 20:30, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Promoted File:Upper Wentworth Falls, NSW, Australia - Nov 2008.jpg --Wronkiew (talk) 04:16, 26 February 2009 (UTC)