Hmm. The pic that was moved to the top is lower-res, lower texture setting, and looks muddy to me. Compare:
There's much better lighting and detail in the second picture, meaning no offense. That was why I took the screenshot; the original wasn't as nice as I'd wanted. --Torang 15:54, 8 April 2011 (EDT)
- Without judging too hard I agree that your images are sharper, almost too sharp ;)
- However, as I selected the one more close-up as the leading image as otherwise the 400px format suppress the details. However, images is very much a matter of personal preferences and some editors like softer landscape motives, others seem to process them for cartoonic colours, etc. Hence it is almost suicide to tell one over the other, at least I consider it a sure stress-test of the wiki-friendship we have :P
- When it comes to images, the only occasions I do not hesitate to replace or edit is when NPC images are dark, not from the front, half-body, or have UI artefacts. A few locations when they have been very distant. Interiors where half the image was carpet or walls and ant-like NPCs far back ;) Usually the quality of our camera-men (and women) are great though, my commendations to all of them.
- Zimoon (talk) 19:36, 1 February 2012 (EST)