Oppose - A nice photo but on the artsy side. A better illustration of the Golden Gate Bridge pillars is certainly possible -- Alvesgaspar22:59, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I do not think it is that relevant to discuss if it is possible to make a better illustration of the golden gate bridge. Rather, the first question is answer is: Is the relatively narrow scope (a prominent design element on a very famous bridge) of sufficient interest to warrant a Valued image in the first place? And if yes, does this one fulfill the other criteria. For instance, the image is not geocoded. Does the lack of geocoding cause a significant loss of value? I mean the place is very well known and the location of the subject is after all only a few clicks away. If this can be mitigated is this image then the best illustration of the subject? One interesting question is the (artsy) perspective. There are other images on Commons of the pillars taken from this projection. For instance Image:Golden Gate Bridge architecture 15.jpg is a very similar photo but IMO in much worse technical condition. An even more artsy view, but which also shows the lightning arrangement on the tower is Image:Ggb101152006.JPG. If we want to consider images which are less artsy we can consider images like Image:Ggb201152006.jpg and Image:Golden Gate Bridge north tower 1.JPG and Image:Golden Gate Bridge north tower 2.JPG. It is such kinds of very specific questions I think should addressed in a VI review. -- Slaunger20:54, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose To my way of thinking, Image:Ggb201152006.jpg is a more valuable photograph of the bridge support. That picture shows the context of the support, e.g., the waterway, the concrete foundation, the other support, the suspension cables and the roadbed structure. The nominated photograph, while an attractive and high quality image, to me it doesn't satisfy the criteria of Commons:Valued image value as well as the alternative cited. The subject is depicted at higher resolution, but it isn't a good angle to illustrate the decorative elements or the catwalks. A strength of the nominated photograph is that the rivets, wire rope strands and paint quality are visible, whereas they are not apparent in the other image. But, that is not enough to make it more valuable, in my opinion. --Walter Siegmund(talk)05:01, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
