A very high resolution stitched panorama image of the iconic landmark in Kolkata. The fully downloaded image viewed at 100% resolution allows exceptional level of details for the viewers. I did not find such high resolution image in wikipedia for this landmark architecture and feel its inclusion will enrich the article.
I have created a edit 2 version of the image and worked on the exposure from scratch to give it an edge to edge consistency. Kindly check and share your views on the latest edit.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Subhrajyoti07
Oppose - The correction of the sky isn't done properly. Use a brightness mask in order to fix it edge-to-edge, and keep saturation & brightness in check. Distortion correction look OK, though. --Janke | Talk11:13, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 May 2018 at 09:09:43 (UTC)
Reason
Iconic photo; unfortunate blur in the bottom right, the rest of the image is pretty good though considering how hard it can be to photograph shiny things with humans in the image.
Comment – Historic moment, but image composition is also marred by people-jumble behind Nixon, who is visible only in profile. Sca (talk) 14:04, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I know nothing about botanic, this is much better quality than other images. I would replace Helleborus odorus (poor composition) by this one. Yann (talk) 17:43, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Several stitching errors or issues with positioning of the individual tiles. There are several bars of pure white mixed in with the white background, like under the third tile/illustration. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 06:01, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Chris Woodrich : It seems a rotation of 0.15° and a slight crop would fix that. CropTool doesn't work here, and I am on a limited connection. Finally, at the 5th tentative, it worked with a lossless crop, but then I may have cropped it too much. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:04, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support the new version I just uploaded. The rotate/crop ended up cutting off part of the atlas, so I went back to the source file to clone in the background. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:14, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support even though a bit of restoration would be in order - dust spots etc. --Janke | Talk 16:49, 10 May 2018 (UTC) Edit: strike support due to double candidacy. --Janke | Talk06:18, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support This picture had been in use in several notable non-wiki shows and website, as the sole representation of Alexandre Dumas. Would be better if someone can colourize the picture.--Respublika Narodnaya (talk) 08:01, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose If you think this version is better, then it's more appropriate to delist and replace. There is no reason to have 2 identical images nominated. Mattximus (talk) 13:38, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Information This was previous featured, but wrongly identified, so I am renominating it under the right name. I don't know what should be done with the old FP nomination page, and with {{POTD/2018-02-28}}. Please help.
Well, that's embarrassing. How did the Savage identification happen? Did the NARA mislabel it, or...? (Procedurally, I don't think we need to re-feature this.) — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:02, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Chris; the image itself is still featured; no need for action apart from correcting the descriptions. Maybe add a comment to the old nomination of the change. --Paul_012 (talk) 06:43, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
With the added comments to old nom, POTD, and renaming of the file, things look clear. May be a good idea !? to run it again as POTD with a description of Georgette Seabrooke. Just a thought. Bammesk (talk) 02:51, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 22 May 2018 at 04:55:28 (UTC)
Reason
Dark purple Trichoglottis orchid (Trichoglottis atropurpurea) at the Brooklyn Botanic Garden. This is a VI and QI on Commons and I find that I keep coming back to it. Nominated for FP on Commons a while back and have since made a few adjustments based on feedback provided there.
@Bammesk: Thanks. Personally, I prefer being able to see the whole "arm", but you are not the first person to propose such a crop. I'd like to see this one through before attempting the crop (since it's already a QI/VI, a major change like that would require a separate file/nomination anyway). — Rhododendritestalk \\ 15:58, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure if that's the correct term, but you can notice many unnatural "spots" or "halos" around the flowers and leaves in full resolution. Tomer T (talk) 09:42, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I guess that's due to some inaccuracy in masking when the background was darkened - halos not visible in original photo, first in the upload history... --Janke | Talk10:41, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Given the edits above are rather late and this nomination will be closing in a couple hours, if this is closed as not promoted before there are any more comments, perhaps you could let me know on my talk page, Tomer T and Janke, if you think it would be worth renominating the newest version. Thanks (sorry for the second ping). — Rhododendritestalk \\ 22:28, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]