70:
51:
145:
wedding was clearly very important for a lot of people.... Both for entertainment/gossip reasons and because it triggered new debate about the continuing worth (or lack thereof) of the
Swedish monarchy. As for the lighting, if it was an overcast day, it was an overcast day... Don't think there will be a chance to reshoot this one.
297:
Itâs just my opinion, but it seems not fully encyclopedic. Itâs a very nice picture and all. Clear. I find the Edit to be a distinct improvement. But I can think of other subject material that seems more encyclopedic and there are more outstanding implementations of technical photography out there.
276:
I'm not sure on if i support or oppose this one yet, however in reply to what you said Greg that doesn't strike me as making a lot of sense. Had this been a staged photograph, the judging of lighting is fine, but in what you have yourself described as an 'Event Photo' the photographer can do nothing
144:
Just a note: I support the new edit, as I think the colors/brightness/contrast look better. I think it's not much of an objection to say that you don't care for the subject matter - we feature photos of many more trivial things (C-list actors, obscure species with tiny stub articles) than this. This
236:
The whole royalty thing is actually a turn-off for me, so judging this just on it's photographic merits, it's poor lighting, they're not looking at the camera, background seems noisy (high iso @ 500), for 3.2mp (native for camera = 12.3mp) it does not have the sharpness and detail you would expect
84:
A Knowledge (XXG) photographer got accredited as part of the authorized press at the royal wedding and got some great shots. I think this one - currently the lead image in the wedding article - is the best one. A pity his hand is slightly over his face, but considering that this is a one-time-only
277:
about it being overcast at all, he's done what he can with the available light and shouldn't be judged on the weather. I mean it's not like another similar picture is going to come up thats not overcast is it? it's a one-chance photo so IMO with that in mind the weather is much less of an issue.
329:
Yeah, valid. The weather on the day is, equally, of interest to the article, so an image of a wedding in which the weather is overcast is neither a negative or a positive in and of itself, but if any image shows what the weather was like, then is a small positive.
312:
I don't disagree at all with what you just said, which is why i'm still unsure if I can support this. My comment was simply about judging pictures on things that were unavoidable, like overcast images on a once in a lifetime oppurtunity.
258:
I agree. This photo seems more âevent-likeâ and I donât think that is a great fit for POTD. Moreover, the overcast day (if this was outside, as it appears) makes this come up quite short of what I would consider âfine photography.â
91:
295:âAnd next on âExtra,â we have exclusive photos of the âŹâ©Royal Wedding âŹâ©. And after the commercial break, *yet another* way Lady Gaga got into the news this week by showing skin and kissing a female groupie.â
468:
450:
434:
406:
387:
342:
324:
307:
288:
268:
250:
228:
209:
195:
172:
154:
139:
65:
in an open carriage through
Stockholm, June 19, 2010. The wedding was described as "Europe's biggest royal wedding since the Prince of Wales married Lady Diana Spencer in 1981."
186:
magazine (celebrity) nature to the subject matter (wedding and all). I just think there are more encyclopedic / less gossipy subject matters than royals getting married.
492:
180:
I had to scroll past this a half dozen times before I could figure out why I didnât think it worthy of FP status. Two reasons: 1) it has drab lighting, and 2) it has a
237:
for a 75% reduction in size from the native size of the camera, probably means it's heavily cropped. All-in-all this does not add up to a feature-able picture. â
112:
482:
103:
17:
182:
200:
The wedding is very much worthy of encyclopedic coverage, and, if anything, this is more eye-catching because of its very "celebrity" nature.
487:
428:
99:
370:
95:
58:
374:
293:
What I mean by âeventâ-like image is that it seems less like a formal or informal portrait of the individuals but more like
69:
402:
50:
164:
Good quality, and wonderful composition. The bit of his hand in front his face doesn't really bother me at all.
443:
423:
464:
396:
366:
150:
135:
120:
224:
378:
219:
Wedding pictures are always eye-catching, and this one is quite well done for a glimpse at royalty.
418:
415:
338:
205:
460:
361:
146:
131:
382:
319:
303:
283:
264:
191:
166:
244:
220:
62:
334:
201:
476:
395:
Don't see the harm in having something a little "current events" once in a while.
314:
299:
278:
260:
187:
239:
457:
Promoted File:Royal
Wedding Stockholm 2010-Slottsbacken-05 edit.jpg
92:
Wedding of
Victoria, Crown Princess of Sweden, and Daniel Westling
68:
49:
28:
Wedding of
Victoria, Crown Princess of Sweden, and Daniel Westling
332:(I'm speaking generally here, not about this image as such.)
35:
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.
76:- Compare at full size to see colour improvements.
113:Knowledge (XXG):Featured pictures/People/Royalty
8:
414:Looks good to me, well-captured moment. --
18:Knowledge (XXG):Featured picture candidates
493:Featured picture nominations/August 2010
7:
104:Prince Daniel, Duke of VÀstergötland
88:Articles in which this image appears
100:When You Tell the World You're Mine
483:Ended featured picture nominations
96:Victoria, Crown Princess of Sweden
85:event, I think it's a great photo.
59:Victoria, Crown Princess of Sweden
24:
102:. A cropped version is also in
1:
488:Featured picture nominations
469:19:06, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
451:04:51, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
435:04:29, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
509:
407:15:09, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
388:00:16, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
343:23:00, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
325:18:19, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
308:23:46, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
289:22:02, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
269:03:53, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
251:01:50, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
229:21:32, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
210:23:04, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
196:20:50, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
173:16:23, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
155:20:11, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
140:15:22, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
121:commons:User:Prolineserver
109:FP category for this image
57:- Wedding procession of
360:It looks regal to me.--
77:
66:
39:Voting period ends on
72:
53:
128:Support as nominator
445:George Chernilevsky
78:
67:
398:Papa Lima Whiskey
386:
333:
47:
500:
446:
431:
426:
421:
399:
364:
331:
322:
317:
286:
281:
249:
247:
242:
169:
38:
36:
508:
507:
503:
502:
501:
499:
498:
497:
473:
472:
444:
429:
424:
419:
397:
320:
315:
284:
279:
245:
240:
238:
167:
63:Daniel Westling
37:
34:
31:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
506:
504:
496:
495:
490:
485:
475:
474:
454:
453:
437:
409:
390:
355:
354:
353:
352:
351:
350:
349:
348:
347:
346:
345:
231:
214:
213:
212:
175:
159:
158:
157:
124:
123:
118:
115:
110:
107:
89:
86:
82:
45:15:22:21 (UTC)
33:
30:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
505:
494:
491:
489:
486:
484:
481:
480:
478:
471:
470:
466:
462:
461:Makeemlighter
458:
452:
449:
447:
441:
438:
436:
432:
427:
422:
417:
413:
410:
408:
404:
400:
394:
391:
389:
384:
380:
376:
372:
368:
363:
359:
356:
344:
340:
336:
328:
327:
326:
323:
318:
311:
310:
309:
305:
301:
296:
292:
291:
290:
287:
282:
275:
272:
271:
270:
266:
262:
257:
254:
253:
252:
248:
243:
235:
232:
230:
226:
222:
218:
215:
211:
207:
203:
199:
198:
197:
193:
189:
185:
184:
179:
176:
174:
171:
170:
163:
160:
156:
152:
148:
143:
142:
141:
137:
133:
129:
126:
125:
122:
119:
116:
114:
111:
108:
105:
101:
97:
93:
90:
87:
83:
80:
79:
75:
71:
64:
60:
56:
52:
48:
46:
42:
29:
26:
19:
456:
455:
448:
440:Support edit
439:
412:Support edit
411:
393:Support edit
392:
362:TonyTheTiger
358:Support edit
357:
294:
273:
255:
233:
216:
181:
177:
165:
161:
147:Calliopejen1
132:Calliopejen1
127:
73:
54:
44:
40:
32:
27:
168:Jujutacular
41:15 Aug 2010
477:Categories
379:WP:CHICAGO
221:Canada Hky
335:J Milburn
202:J Milburn
55:Original
416:King of
383:WP:FOUR
274:Comment
256:Comment
217:Support
162:Support
117:Creator
321:(talk)
316:JFitch
300:Greg L
285:(talk)
280:JFitch
261:Greg L
234:Oppose
188:Greg L
183:People
178:Oppose
81:Reason
61:, and
241:raeky
16:<
465:talk
403:talk
339:talk
304:talk
265:talk
225:talk
206:talk
192:talk
151:talk
136:talk
74:Edit
442:--
375:BIO
43:at
479::
467:)
459:--
433:â
405:)
385:)
341:)
306:)
267:)
227:)
208:)
194:)
153:)
138:)
130:--
98:,
94:,
463:(
430:âŁ
425:âŠ
420:â„
401:(
381:/
377:/
373:/
371:C
369:/
367:T
365:(
337:(
302:(
263:(
246:T
223:(
204:(
190:(
149:(
134:(
106:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
