Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Mt Anne from High Shelf Camp.jpg

Mt Anne from High Shelf Camp

Reason

It wasn't really my intention when taking the photo, but this actually turns out to be an excellent illustration for this habitat. It replaced File:Huon river tasmania in summer.JPG in the flora section of the Tasmania article. Prominent endemic species include Richea pandanifolia, Richea scoparia and Athrotaxis selaginoides. It is annotated a bit here.

Articles in which this image appears

Heath (habitat), Plant community

Creator

Noodle snacks

• Support as nominator --
  talk) 23:31, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Comment. Nice, but is it tone mapped? The tonal range looks a bit peculiar and inconsistent. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 00:51, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not in the HDR sense no. There is a graduated blend between two exposures, but its very minor, the unprocessed RAW looks quite similar.
    talk) 01:23, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • Hmm ok, colour balance definitely seems a bit off to me. Too pink. Look at the soil in the foreground - it looks distinctly pink. Likewise the vegetation and rocks. Obviously I wasn't there, but I've uploaded an image that I think is more realistic looking. What do you think? Ðiliff «» (Talk) 18:12, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think the edit is a little too green looking at the shadows on mt anne in particular. Seems to be closer to neutral though. I'll try and get around to uploading a slightly greener one over the original unless you want to do it.
        talk) 06:30, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply
        ]
        • Fair enough. You can do it, given you were there. I'm sure there was some pink glow in the clouds from the sunset, but the scene just seemed to be too pink-tinted (due to incorrect colour balance, not just tinting, I mean), as the bushes and soil which should have been in shadow appeared just as pink as the more exposed areas, although I suppose it is possible that the sky directly overhead was also pink, and reflecting into the shadows. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 14:26, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Nice image that captures context and species detail simultaneously. Melburnian (talk) 12:01, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Support--Mbz1 (talk) 15:20, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, prefer original. The
  dolerite columns across the tarn are nicely lit. Some indication of scale in the description would be nice; are they really over 100m high, as the route descriptions here suggest? The pinkness of the ground doesn't surprise me given the colour in the clouds to the right. -- Avenue (talk) 00:35, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • The scale is accurate on that page, though the bottom of the east face isn't quite visible.
    talk) 06:30, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply
    ]
• Support either, preference to original per above and I also find it more visualy appealing. Benjamint 14:01, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Support either pref to alt as more realistic colouring and IMO therefore better EV, however orig is also good enough... Gazhiley (talk) 12:07, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Support with preference to the edit. --Muhammad(talk) 13:59, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Mt Anne from High Shelf Camp.jpg --Makeemlighter (talk) 05:27, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]