Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Laser Towards Milky Ways Centre.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Laser Towards Milky Ways Centre.jpg, featured
[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2010 at 06:33:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created by ESO/Y. Beletsky - uploaded by Lars Lindberg Christensen - nominated by Spongie555 -- Spongie555 (talk) 06:33, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Support -- Spongie555 (talk) 06:33, 7 November 2010 (UTC)- Support --Llez (talk) 12:32, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support Interesting --Schnobby (talk) 13:40, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support--Mbz1 (talk) 16:12, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry to spoil the party, but am I the only one to notice lots of noise in the darker parts? --Pjt56 (talk) 16:57, 7 November 2010 (UTC)- Support --Karelj (talk) 17:08, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support Jacopo Werther (talk) 19:45, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose I am so sad to vote oppose, but I must. As Pjt56 pointed out, there is so much noise here, especially around the edges, and distortions. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 21:15, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Neutral tending towards support. Huge wow and noise. Looks absolutely great in preview but really noisy in 2 MP review size (full res is even worse, but it is not fair to review a photo taken at these light conditions in full res). --Slaunger (talk) 21:42, 7 November 2010 (UTC)- Oppose Too much noise and too much chromatic noise. I cannot understand, in addition, what happens to the building of the left: Distortion? It isn't a building? It is thus?--Miguel Bugallo 23:36, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose Per others--Jebulon (talk) 00:06, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support I couldn't find the EXIF data for this image, but I imagine that the photographer used an exposure time of 15-30 seconds and an ISO speed of 1600 or 3200. The high ISO speed inevitably creates noise, but it is necessary in the lighting conditions to expose the stars well (especially the Milky Way) without any streaks or trails. Also, according to the description on the source page, this was taken with a wide angle lens, covering 180 degrees of the sky, hence the "fish-eye" distortion. I gladly support this picture. - LeavXC (talk) 03:23, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose Per others-- Mulazimoglu (talk) 07:17, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose Very impressive sky and laser beam... but sorry, there is too much chromatic aberration in the stars. --Cayambe (talk) 10:23, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support Despite some inevitable quality issues: this is a great image. -- MJJR (talk) 22:41, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose Per user HFSW. mgeo talk 09:56, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support With MJJR –hoverFly | chat? 22:35, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support -- Yes, there is noise in the photo, but I don't think that's very important because the scene is very impressive. Wonderful display of science at work. -- Onno Zweers (talk) 19:43, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support--Wertuose (talk) 08:21, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support --IdLoveOne (talk) 05:27, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support Kooritza (talk) 06:02, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support for wow, rarity, and educational value despite all the noise, distortion and peculiar fan-shaped CA (especially severe towards the sides). --Avenue (talk) 00:57, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 7 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 07:36, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Space exploration
