File talk:Hills south west of Sanandaj near the village of Kilaneh.jpg

It's awful - like one of those rippling, glowing pictures found in a bad Indian or Chinese takeaway.

you can vote for its delisting. bogdan 21:55, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd just like to point that out.

-- Mik 01:35, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This photograph also has some photoshop work in it -- probably someone played with the saturation controls. ;-) bogdan 00:46, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This picture doesn't look real at all. It looks more like art Jcdizon

Definitely doctored.

Any chance that this is a HDR photo? Olentz

It looks like the sky fake... they just don't look real. There is no noise on it like there is in the rest of the image. Sererena 04:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not HDR. HDR usually leaves a glow on the edges of things. This photo is not real...

[nt]

-- Mik 02:53, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

any evidence of photoshopping?

looks photoshopped to me, should be removed. Sad mouse 17:28, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

this is obivously edited, the clouds are fake; that is, the clouds aren't clouds, they're actually patches of sky. Spiff 18:49, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kurdistan_Province is a disambiguation page. please replace that with Kurdistan Province (Iran)--Pejman47 07:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This photo is obviously edited. Just look at the sky, esp. near the clouds. Have you seen clouds with such clearly-defined edges? -RobbyPrather (talk) 07:51, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded While some playing with color levels etc is obviously OK, this crosses the line into "photoillustration". I don't usually monitor Featured picture candidates, it seems those people missed the fact that this clearly fails Featured picture criteria 5: "Be accurate". --Dgies 17:54, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thirded At first I thought it might be weird efferct from altitude, but 1400m doesn't create those effects. (Check the other pictures at Sanandaj). ~ trialsanderrors 19:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

<AOL> me too! </AOL>. -- Maybe someone should nominate it for delisting: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates#Nomination for delisting bogdan 20:32, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fifth This picture is obviously doctored. Also the colors are so super saturated that the mountains are 1 shade of gray with white snow. 66.171.76.183 20:44, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose You guys do not get it! This image is not intended to be a true representation of anything. It is a free replacement for the default wallpaper of Windows XP. -- Petri Krohn 01:05, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOT#WEBSPACE. ~ trialsanderrors 07:12, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here is roughly what happened to this image (for illustration purposes only, I'll remove the demonstration later), based on a detail of another, unmanipulated picture by the same photographer. In the left frame, an unmanipulated detail of the sky with clouds and the horizon. In the middle frame, I used a magic wand to select the blue sky and created another layer. I filled the selected area with 54-122-226 Blue and set the layer to 62% darken. In the right frame, a closeup of the middle section showing the effect of the masking. There are two tell-tale signs: 1. The clearly defined boundaries of the clouds, and 2. the lack of gradation between sky at the top of the image and sky close to the horizon. With pretty much any picture of a blue sky you take, the blue gets lighter closer to the horizon. ~ trialsanderrors 21:13, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated this image for removing its featured status. You can say your opinion at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Hills south west of Sanandaj near the village of Kilaneh delist. bogdan 21:30, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I copied this to the top of the page to make it more visible. ~ trialsanderrors 23:07, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

this image 100% fake, not photoshopped by incredibly high saturation, which amounts to fake

Not to discredit the author of this picture, but it has been doctored (at least the sky is). This best visible on the cloud in the top right corner. The color-correction seems a bit overdone too. Otherwise I find it quite pleasing.

Does the Wikipedia have a policy regarding doctored images (allthough in this particular case I don't see a problem)?

/m

Here is a much more realistic version on Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kureshanbari/124220938/ 12.207.135.128 00:48, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]