Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Ice shelf (Antarctic Sound)

Ice shelf (Antarctic Sound)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2016 at 23:42:51 (UTC)

Alt1 – CSS image crop

Reason: High quality, high EV
Articles in which this image appears: Ice shelf, Antarctic Sound
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena/Others
Creator: Godot13

Support as nominator – Godot13 (talk) 23:42, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – very nice image, good EV, but the thickness of the ice feels somewhat muted, I wish the image had more of a punch in highlighting the ice boundary (may be if the water was more blue, but given the location I know what I am asking for is a tall order!). I am undecided about supporting. Bammesk (talk) 14:05, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Bammesk- I understand, I figured this might be a bit of a long shot. The absolute enormity of the shelf is lost without some kind of anchor or reference point. While the ice extends from the mountain 6 miles, my position (using a 300mm lens) was 6 miles from the edge of the ice, so 12 miles from the mountains. Two things in conjunction could have improved it- a 600mm lens with some penguins for size reference. While I have no concrete visible evidence in this case, I would imagine the scale to look something like this.--Godot13 (talk) 00:13, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Godot13: I added Alt1 (a CSS image crop), less sky puts more emphasis on the ice boundary, what do you think? Bammesk (talk) 16:36, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    - @Bammesk: The balance is better, good call. Should the ALT pass, I'll make it a hard crop.--Godot13 (talk) 16:54, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Jobas (talk) 16:02, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. An estimate of the height of the ice ledge or cliff in the middle distance would be good to include if at all possible. When I first looked at the picture I thought it was a few feet, perhaps even the size you could step up onto. It was a great surprise to me to learn, as suggested above, that it could actually be this big. 31.49.180.169 (talk) 17:34, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Mathematical Question - Going back to the raw file I measured what appeared to be the tallest point of the ice edge on the left, center, and right of the image. Enlarging the image to 400% and counting pixels produced 0.683 inches, 0.387 inches, and 0.47 inches respectively. Knowing the distance from the camera to the ice edge was six miles, is there a mathematical way to calculate the height of the ice edge?--Godot13 (talk) 18:57, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - 6 times (36 divided by 300) = # of miles end to end in the horizontal direction of your raw image. 6 for the miles, 36 for the sensor, 300 for focal length. Bammesk (talk) 20:34, 16 October 2016 (UTC) ...Your raw image is 0,72 miles (or 3802 feet) end to end horizontally, then measure the ice height with respect to that (use the raw image, not crops). Bammesk (talk) 21:09, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - On the image description page, and on the caption on this page, it says "the distance from the edge of the ice-shelf to the first visible mountain peak is approximately six miles". With no other information, this may give the impression that the edge of the ice shelf is fairly close to the camera, at a distance that is not very signficant compared to six miles. However, I've just noticed in the comments above something that I overlooked earlier, that the distance from the camera to the ice-shelf is also six miles. I think it would be very desirable to add that information to the image description page, and possibly to the caption in the places that the image is used. To my eye, the edge of the ice-shelf appears much, much closer. Knowing it is six miles away helps to understand that it also must be very much higher than it appears. 31.49.180.169 (talk) 20:52, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The maximum height of the edge of the ice shelf (taking the highest point in each third of the ice's edge) ranges from 50.8 to 89.6 feet high. This figure likely means that the comparison provided is roughly accurate for the low end of the range, and an underestimation at the high end.IF a (raw image) span of 0,72 miles wide (3802 feet or 45,624 inches) = 28.96 inches (by pixel count) --> 45,624/28.96 = X/0.683 (using the highest point measured) --> 28.96X = 45,624*0.683 --> then X = 1,076 inches or 89.6 feet.--Godot13 (talk) 22:48, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alt1 – EV. Also how about adding something like this to the image description: "This image is captured at a distance of 6 miles from the ice-water boundary. At the boundary, ice shelf extends 50 to 90 feet above water." Bammesk (talk) 23:58, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support Note, though, that Alt1 and the Original are the same file; I don't know how this affects User:Bammesk's vote. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 17:11, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Adam- A successful ALT (as I understand it) would mean a hard-crop version at Bammesk's specs.--Godot13 (talk) 19:07, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 23:43, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination didn't reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 23:43, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]