Comment, after reading the responses below I can only agree to that it doesn't fully fulfill the criteria, no matter how enchanting it is, so I withdraw from the nomination. Mikael Häggström (talk) 08:12, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose The highlights are totally blown. Suggest speedy close - "snowball's chance"... --Janke | Talk 16:21, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Regretful oppose I wouldn't go so far as speedy close, but the highlights are a deal-breaker. I can tell that it must have been beautiful in real life, though...--HereToHelp(talk to me) 16:35, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Comment suboptimal perhaps, but I think it actually adds to the beauty of the picture with water shining as brightly as the sun. Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:07, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose I have to agree with Janke, and I also see a bit of noise in the photo. SpencerT♦C 18:57, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose As the author of the picture, I overexposed the picture (pictures, it's a panorama) for artistic reasons, since I think that the dense, vivid green vegetation details creates a better effect than seeing every details in the water and steam (the far waterfalls are always covered in steam anyway). I really do appreciate that Mikael thought this picture is worth FP mention, but it clearly fails "rule" number 1, which is the reason why I did not nominated this picture in first, and also why I need to oppose it right now. However, I would like to mention that FP status, although interesting from an author POV, is just as interesting as when someone simply say that he is appreciating my work. I really thank you Mikael for your comments. --S23678 (talk) 04:49, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose per all above. It's a beautiful picture (double rainbow!), just doesn't fit the bill as an FPC. Amphy (talk) 03:24, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
