Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Thorn Tree Sossusvlei Namib Desert Namibia Luca Galuzzi 2004.JPG

Image:Thorn Tree Sossusvlei Namib Desert Namibia Luca Galuzzi 2004.JPG

#1  #2

Original - featured

•  Info created by Lucag - uploaded by Lucag - nominated by Simonizer 14:10, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Nice composition and colours, good contrasts, too --Simonizer 14:10, 16 May 2007 (UTC) changed my vote to the new version --Simonizer 00:06, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
  •  Support contrasts are better here. So i vote for both --Simonizer 10:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Very nice. There is a lot of noise in the sky though. Moved to new version. ---Digon3 14:21, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --Thermos 14:29, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
•  Support -- MJJR 15:36, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
•  Support HOT ! --Makro Freak 15:46, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Romary 20:55, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Vmenkov 23:55, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose I don't like the noise in the image, it makes the image look less sharp. The sky is bland and noisy too. -- Ram-Man 05:53, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
•  Neutral It seems to be on a slight tilt, and I think that an edit could give the color alot more impact --Benjamint444 11:44, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --Winiar^✉ 13:27, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Zeilski 13:12, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
•  Neutral - Composition and colours are nice, but quality doesn't match. Alvesgaspar 19:56, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
•  Support very typical but impressing. Its noisy but sharp - so everything's allright. Nice tones. The second version is less of contrast Metoc 23:03, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose I'm sorry to oppose for a photo I like, the composition and colours are just great, but the image is very unsharp. Look at the bushes at the lower-right corner, they are so unsharp that they seem blurry. (Would that be because of the Canon 300D standard lens ?) The sky degradé isn't very smooth either (Iso 800). --Atoma 10:41, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

 9 support, 2 neutral, 2 oppose >> featured - Alvesgaspar 20:47, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

New version - not featured

•  Info Thanks everyone. Uploaded a far less compressed version, rotated 0.85° CCW, sRGB color space. --LucaG 23:07, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
•  Support In two weeks time, I'm going to go and check if that tree is still there ;-) -- Lycaon 23:30, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --Digon3 23:40, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Nice composition and colours, good contrasts, too --Simonizer 00:05, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Although the color could still be better --Benjamint444 07:01, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --Karelj 21:10, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose I'm sorry to oppose for a photo I like, the composition and colours are just great, but the image is very unsharp. Look at the bushes at the lower-right corner, they are so unsharp that they seem blurry. (Would that be because of the Canon 300D standard lens ?) The sky degradé isn't very smooth either (Iso 800). --Atoma 10:41, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose As per my comments above and Atoma. Also, I like the original color better anyway. -- Ram-Man 11:58, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

 5 support, 2 oppose >> not featured (featured alternate version) - Alvesgaspar 20:46, 28 May 2007 (UTC)