Commons:Featured picture candidates/Main Pod CN Tower, Toronto

Main Pod CN Tower, Toronto, not featured

Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2008 at 20:17:10

•  Info created by Wladyslaw - uploaded by Wladyslaw - nominated by myself
•  Support as Nominator Wladyslaw (talk) 13:01, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --Barabas (talk) 20:34, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
•  Comment - I wonder why such a small aperture was used. The result is a less-than-perfect focus. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:48, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

   Comment the pic looks quite sharp to me --che 22:30, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

•  Oppose not good quality, we dont know how the object is big, the composition is not good.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 05:48, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
  •  CommentIf you look at the lowest plattform with the grid you can see the spyglasses on it. with this you should get an idea of the dimensions. composition: what is in your opinion the better composition to show a symmetric object? Wladyslaw (talk) 07:23, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
    • Well, but it is not visible for the first look, moreover that is not a measure. Well composition. Maybe some clouds missing, I mean monolitic object on the monolitic backgroun. In fact the object has some structures also.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 09:43, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
      • I see no chance to integrate an object (person, etc.) for reasons of comparison with the main pod (it is situated in 350 meters over ground). From view of an architect this photography is very interessting because you get a very good idea of the structure — simply just there are no clouds or other interfering objects around there. The photography should illustrate an enzyklopedic article and not be used as a picture postcard. Wladyslaw (talk) 11:36, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Good JukoFF (talk) 16:47, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Yarl ✉ 17:48, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose There is nothing special or dramatic in this picture. --MarPac (talk) 21:27, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose Should and could be better --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 18:05, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose Composition, no WOW. --Karelj (talk) 21:13, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Albertus teolog (talk) 18:15, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --Lošmi (talk) 21:09, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
•  Support I like it. Clear (talk) 21:46, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose due to composition. --Dori - Talk 22:46, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
•  Support I like the colors (deep blue, clear red) and light (gives volume to the subject), and I think the tight crop captures something different, but really interesting, of a monument we are used to see in full size; the futurist look of the pod offers a great contrast with the relative classic look of the entire tower (not show here). --S23678 (talk) 17:46, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose composition. --Lestat (talk) 19:55, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
•  Support -- DarkAp89  Commons 10:45, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose composition. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 22:00, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

result: 9 supports, 7 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk) 20:35, 22 October 2008 (UTC)