@ana:
Just used a polarization filter. No or hardly extra explicit saturation added..

@ana
sorry, I checked the original and apparently I did add some saturation. Forgot about that..

@mysight
Sure I work on photo's (the Gimp though), but besides levels, curves, some saturation and a big spot of dust This image hasn't been worked on. Nothing I wouldn't have done in a darkroom..

Man,I think I would want to spend all mt time out there! So it's a pretty real shot of the place.

@mysight
well yes.. at that time.. Being the Netherlands we have our share of cloudy and depressing weather. But once in a while we do get lucky..

@montage
well, around here's it's not a daily happening either. But there are those moments..;)

Hey! I'm glad it's featured! I was sure of that! Congratulations!

@Soph,
Thanks! As almost usual (for me) the image was just on the edge and waiting for someone to push it over. As the score or # of comments didn't chance, I guess the number of views plays a role too..

yes it does. I've clicked on many images and done nothing but that, and sent them to the FP.
Congrats!

Wonderful wonderland. I would have rated this highly. Well done. Congratulations.

I don't think number of views has anything to do with its being featured. It was coincidence. All that matters is the overall average, IMHO.

@king but the score and the number of comments haven't changed for more than a day. Many news photos were already promoted so there has to be some other variable..

@all
Thanks!

I love this shot. The fact that the rooflines are barely visible adds to the mystique.

Jondor...I've kept track of the statistics for all 95 of my submissions since September last year...of course I don't have statistics for any other member. There is nothing in the statistics to indicate that anything other than the Overall Average plays a role, and no indication that any one category (e.g., Relevance) is more important (carries more weight) than any other category.

I'm open to the idea that something else is at work, but it would be difficult to test any such assumption. Mind sharing your Overall Average? Was it approximately 3.62?

What sense would it make to count the number of click throughs, unless the system also counted only once per W.S. member? There could be something else going on, and I think that is the case...although I would *love* to know. I study the ratings system as another hobby. Sad, I know.

@king
Relevance: 3.77
Impact: 3.85
Composition: 3.85
Technique: 3.85
Quality: 4.00
Overall: 3.864

Which it has been and stayed for the last one and a have day. While I don't really "study" the subject I try to understand what's happening. For my feeling after the first few photo's the breakpoint was somewhere around the 3.7 overall which made me feel quite sure it would make it.
Actually I did happen to me for the last 3 or 4 promoted photo's. I get over that 3.7, a long time I see photo's being promoted and than something happens and I get lucky too.. It just makes one wonder..;-) Trying to sort out the rules is part of the fun.. Nothing sad about that..

Jondor,

Congratulations on your very high ratings. :>)

I suggested 3.62, because I've never had a shot rated higher than that failed to be featured. In my experience, 3.864 is high enough to get your shot featured as soon as it got to the head of the line of to-be featured images waiting to make the home page.

You know that each new featured image is allowed some minimum time (around two hours, I think), to sit by itself at the top of the featured images before the next featured image is allowed to appear.

My hunch is that something simply got turned awry. The system isn't perfect. At the moment, the automated theme selection tool is not working correctly, so Brandon has programmed the next two themes manually.