Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Gebang

Gebang

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2014 at 02:13:14 (UTC)

Original – Gebang is an 8th-century Hindu temple located on the outskirts of Yogyakarta, Indonesia. It was constructed in the 8th century by the Medang Kingdom and rediscovered in 1936.

Reason

High resolution, good framing. Don't mind the teal-ish thing behind the trees; that's Maguwoharjo Stadium, just across the river from the temple

Articles in which this image appears

Gebang, Kewu Plain, Candi of Indonesia

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture

Creator

Chris Woodrich

• Support as nominator -- — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:13, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
• Support ///EuroCarGT 03:03, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
• Support — Much more visually interesting than Sambisari 3 below. Sca (talk) 15:25, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
• Support -- Godot13 (talk) 03:32, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
• Support - Great framing, maybe a little soft when zoomed in, but really quite good. Thanks for posting all these excellent photographs. Mattximus (talk) 02:28, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

  Comment I feel there is, however, a slight issue of scale, I wasn't aware of how big it was until I saw [1]. It looked much smaller to me, but perhaps I'm the only one.

  Not particularly big, in my opinion. 5.25 by 5.25 metres (17.2 ft × 17.2 ft) at the base and 8 metres (26 ft) in height. Sambisari is (volume wise) bigger. A person in the frame for scale would just end up blocking the view, IMHO. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:16, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

  Judging from the thumbnail though, it really looks about 3-4 metres tall to me. I suppose the camera angle is suggestive. It looks like you're taking the photo from around 40-50% of the height of the structure, although being so close to it, the angle might make it deceptive. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 18:43, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

  It's possible. I tried to photograph from a bit higher up, allowing a more heads-on view. Though to be honest in person it didn't look 8m tall. As for the angle, this is the only one that gives the impression of 8m. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 20:50, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

  Could it be that it just looks like it has a bench around the base made for someone to sit? I agree with Diliff, I estimated it maybe 3m tall, not 8. I think it's due to how it looks like I can go up and sit right on it. Still believe it's a featured picture. Just as an aside, the problem exists for the dome at St. Peter's Basilica, which does not look like one of the largest domes in the world. Mattximus (talk) 23:55, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

  That is really interesting. Thanks for the links. Perspective is a fun thing to explore. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:24, 16 January 2014 (UTC)