Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sant'Andrea della Valle (Roma) - Dome.jpg

File:Sant'Andrea della Valle (Roma) - Dome.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jul 2015 at 11:50:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Sant'Andrea della Valle (Roma) - Dome.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sant'Andrea della Valle (Roma) - Dome.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
•  Info The fresco decoration of Sant'Andrea's dome was one of the largest commissions of its day. The work was disputed by two Carracci pupils, Giovanni Lanfranco and Domenichino. In 1608, Lanfranco had been chosen by Cardinal Alessandro, but the Ludovisi papacy of Pope Gregory XV favored the Bolognese Domenichino. In the end, both artists were employed, and Lanfranco's lavish dome decoration (completed 1627) set the model for such decorations for the following decades. This dome was for a long time the third largest dome in Rome, after the Basilica of St Peter and the Pantheon. All by LivioAndronico talk 11:50, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Support -- LivioAndronico talk 11:50, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Really beautiful. --Tremonist (talk) 13:15, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Well done Slaunger... --Laitche (talk) 14:33, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

• Thanks Laitche,but I was also before --LivioAndronico talk 14:49, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

--Laitche (talk) 18:36, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Funny comment, Laitche -- Slaunger (talk) 20:28, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Also this before me --LivioAndronico talk 20:48, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

•  Support--ArildV (talk) 15:04, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 15:33, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:04, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Very beautiful! -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 17:11, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Interesting subject and good quality. But you should really try HDR. It's very easy with Lightroom 6. --Code (talk) 17:58, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose Agree with Code here and sorry for interrupting the party that overexposed area in a non-symmetry spot is spoiling it to me. This shot should have been executed using a HDR technique. Poco² 18:41, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

• Poco exist also the  Neutral. Digo esto .... si quería probarlo --LivioAndronico talk 21:02, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

• I make use sometimes of the neutral vote, because I feel that I have something to contribute with in a nomination, sometimes I just don't participate in the nomination. In this case I opposed because I feel that I have to oppose. The execution is not at FP level IMO and the quality or subject doesn't compensate that. Poco² 12:37, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

• Esperamos que una vez que te sientes neutral --LivioAndronico talk 12:53, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

• Yes Code but the point is that I do not have my camera in the HDR therefore face the speech: 1) Do these photos is not easy otherwise it says that are not centered! 2) I haven't the HDR in my Nikon D3200 so should I put my camera on the ground, change the position 2 or 3 times and put it back in the same spot (I point out that while I had the camera on the ground (I put it on the ground because I can not use a tripod, I challenge anyone to use a tripod in a church in the center of Rome, a priest with clear German accent and honestly very similar to Ratzinger told me: Finish do these antics and go out to them ... this is a church). 3) in addition, the domes are therefore always on the altar in a place where you can not go unnoticed. Grazie per il supporto --LivioAndronico talk 20:59, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

• Strange. I didn't know that the D3200 doesn't even support automatic exposure bracketing. Even the smaller Canons like my old 500D support AEB. You should buy yourself a new camera soon, I think your pictures would definitely benefit from a better equipment. P.S.: I hope you're not really putting the camera upon the altar, are you? However, the photo is good and the subject is nice. But it would definitely be better if you had used HDR. --Code (talk) 06:20, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
• I'm really surprised that the churches in Rome are so strict about tripods. Very few in England (or France) care about tripods. It might be a church but it is also a historical architectural building and should be documented well. After all, you're not destroying the sanctity simply by taking a photo! In fact, many people cause much more of a problem in a church by using a bad quality cheap camera with automatic flash turned on. The flash is so much more distracting for the visitors to the church than a tripod! Well, at least now I know not to bother trying to take photos in churches in Rome. But if I do visit, I'll definitely try to see how many times I can get away with a photo though. ;-) Diliff (talk) 23:21, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

• So will but my bank balance think very differently --LivioAndronico talk 14:44, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

•  Support --· Favalli ⟡ 23:12, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Support God natural tones. I am not fan of HDR tonality. Maybe Anglo-Saxon world could bear it (Gothic especially), since there are no such lively frescos and colors like in Romanic Italy. I am wondering what maestros would say when they see their masterpiece in HDR colors. Rather see when is good time (light), you have strong sun now, i would wait for cloudy day for this one. --Mile (talk) 07:17, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Support -- Pofka (talk) 09:57, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose Better to have a little more noise than this overexposure. Ideally, of course, this would be done as a HDRi. — Julian H.^✈ 11:35, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Great! --Σπάρτακος (talk) 15:43, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Support I don't think the overexposed area spoils the picture, it's part of the natural light at the moment. --Xicotencatl (talk) 15:45, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose Oculus seems not centered. The overexposed area is a pity. Very good place, nice shot, but, need of HDR or not, I agree with Poco here.--Jebulon (talk) 22:52, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose Overexposed. Yann (talk) 14:52, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 13:55, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings

•  Info Demoted/Delisted to not featured per this consensus. --Cart (talk) 12:47, 18 October 2018 (UTC)