Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:St Giles in the Fields Church, London - Diliff.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2014 at 23:05:39 (UTC)

Reason: A technically high quality image of the church. A slightly unconventional angle for a church interior but I think it was necessary in this case - the chandelier lighting is very low and centred such that they obscure the stained glass. I think the angle works though. The perspective is corrected so that the pews are horizontal which is more aesthetically pleasing IMO.
Articles in which this image appears: St Giles in the Fields
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
Creator: User:Diliff

Support as nominator --Ðiliff «» (Talk) 23:05, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support The church is quite lovely. It took me a few times to come back to the image for the unconventional angle to grow on me. I now quite like it, especially within the context of the article. Jujutacular (talk) 05:52, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. Judging from the lack of responses to this one compared to my other image above, it seems that others find it difficult to appreciate also. I think part of the problem is that it doesn't leap out at you in the thumbnail. I do think it's an image that impresses more in the detail than in the superficial view. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 13:40, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support The technical quality and ev win me over despite not being in love with the angle of view or aspect ratio. -- Colin°^Talk 20:50, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
'Comments The comments that I made above on the Guildhall image apply even more to this image. The left hand side has had the perspective too severely compensated, which means, in effect, that to achieve that appearance, the wall would need to be leaning outwards about as radically as the famous Tower of Pizza. Amandajm (talk) 05:58, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Solid shot, and the angle has grown on me over the past couple days. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:14, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 23:19, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough support for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 23:19, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]