Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:San Francisco City Hall as seen from 100 Van Ness at dusk.jpg

File:San Francisco City Hall as seen from 100 Van Ness at dusk.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2016 at 04:47:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:San Francisco City Hall as seen from 100 Van Ness at dusk.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:San Francisco City Hall as seen from 100 Van Ness at dusk.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
•  Info created by dllu - uploaded by dllu - nominated by Dllu -- dllu (t,c) 04:47, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
•  Support -- dllu (t,c) 04:47, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose The composition is unbalanced. Tight crop at top, half a building roof at bottom, big empty space at right balanced against half-cropped buildings at left. Nice light though. lNeverCry 07:01, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment For this type of photo you must take the physical possibilities into account. I cannot make the building I'm standing on grow taller, nor can I float in mid air next to the building. Also, it was a rare opportunity for me to gain access to this vantage point since I do not live at 100 Van Ness. Anyway, here's the wider version of the panorama below. Please suggest some better crops. dllu (t,c) 08:42, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

• @Dllu: The panorama below is much better. I think a looser crop with more room on top would be another improvement, but the panorama as it is has more space for the eye to move around in and feels more free. The absence of space is a common shortcoming in many images. lNeverCry 19:52, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment - I like the full panorama better. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:06, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
•  Support works very well, imo --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:31, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
•  Support but the panorama would be even better. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:27, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose in favor of alternative. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:24, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Alternative

•  Info Wider version of above picture, for voting.
•  Support -- dllu (t,c) 18:35, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
•  Support also fine! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:49, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
•  Support I'll go for this. --cart-Talk 18:55, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
•  Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:05, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
•  Support --Laitche (talk) 19:18, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
•  Support lNeverCry 19:45, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
•  Support And 7...--LivioAndronico ^(talk) 21:35, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
•  Support And 8. :-) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:54, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
•  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:37, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
•  Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:39, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
•  Support OK, no metadata here, either, but no questions I have that they would help answer, either. Daniel Case (talk) 07:43, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
•  Support Albertus teolog (talk) 12:10, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
•  Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 15:40, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:21, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes

The chosen alternative is: File:San Francisco City Hall as seen from 100 Van Ness at dusk (wide).jpg