Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Moraine Lake

Moraine Lake

Moraine Lake and the Valley of the Ten Peaks in Banff National Park, Alberta.

This stunning image by Commons User:Gorgo is not only of good quality, but adds a lot to the articles it is in (Moraine Lake, Valley of the Ten Peaks, Banff National Park, Rocky Mountains, and Mountains of Alberta). The clear reflection of the mountains on the lake is quite beatutiful. I've also added a panorama of Moraine Lake for you consideration

Nominate and support. - NauticaShades^(talk) 15:21, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose both. Purple fringes on left mountaintop, not very sharp in full size. Panorama suffers from "3x255-syndrome" at right, i.e. overexposed, blown highlights. --Janke | Talk 15:40, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose both per Janke. Also, blown highlights are prominent in both images, not just the pano. -- Moondigger 15:57, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose both per above; mottled pixelation in sky, blown highlights on treetrunks. They are nice big pictures, but not so sharp. --Bridgecross 20:41, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose both. Per above; blown highlights are too big of a problem. Stitching is apparent in the sky of the second image. --Tewy 21:48, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support, especially for the panorama -- there's more to a picture than pixelation, guys. This picture is exceptional. Robert 06:07, 27 September 2006 (UTC) *[reply]
- Except that the first two criteria for FP are specifically that; 1:high quality and 2:high resolution. Item 1 immediately mentions JPG artifacts and graininess in the first sentence. Agree that this composition is very nice, and in a higher quality would be an FP. --Bridgecross 14:33, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The panorama Image:Moraine Lake by Lake Louise Alberta Canada.jpg was featured and photo of the day on commons on June 19, 2005, in spite of the stiching artifacts in the upper left. --Qyd 17:22, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support first one, very good picture, even though some users believe there are some artifacts in the HighRes. -- Chris 73 | Talk 13:45, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support I like the first one (the one on the top) better. Could have been better, but we are worse off not nominating it. | AndonicO 12:04, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support Both Very good picture. I like it a lot and specially since it's from Canada, it's even better. It's true a higher quality would have gain a full support. But the nominator forgot to mention that this also appears on the back of the old 1979 20$ bills of Canada. ;-) Arad 12:17, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Really? Do you have a picture? NauticaShades^(talk) 06:50, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bank of Canada has pictures of bills featuring the Valley of the Ten Peaks: link --Qyd 15:08, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, exactly, 1978. I like the old bills better than the new ones. Arad 17:07, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support Purple fringes? There is a shadow there in the top image, and with the way ice and glaciers can reflect light, sometimes glaciers appear bluish and shadows can appear purplish. Does this image value to an article? This scene, as mentioned above, was once pictured on the Canadian $20 bill. It's an iconic scene, likely one that Banff National Park is best known for and adds a great deal to the article. The top image is high quality, with lighting that captures the reflections in the water. --Aude (talk) 20:36, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The "purple fringes" are an artifact of the camera lens & CCD. Rahter common in highligts on low-end digital cameras (and some better ones, too). --Janke | Talk 12:42, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --KFP (talk | contribs) 10:17, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As it turned out, the picture appeared on WP main page after all (on October 15, 2006, to illustrate the featured article Banff National Park). --Qyd 20:07, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]