Terneuzen area view to the S and W   (4,0 based on 5 ratings)    viewed: 536x
previous panorama
next panorama
Orientation on / offOrientation on / off
Details / LabelsDetails / Labels Markers on / offMarkers on / off Overview on / offOverview on / off   
 Cycle through labels:   first previous stop
play
pause
next last
  zoom out
 

Labels

1 Apartments Sint-Niklaas city (B) 30 km
2 Otheense creek (NL) 4 km
3 Axel water tower 9km
4 Ski dome Terneuzen 5 km
5 Sluiskil industry (NL) 6.5 km
6 Water tower Wachtebeke (B) 19 km
7 Arcelor Mittal (B) most polluting iron factory in Europe 18 km
8 Rodenhuize coal power plant 23 km
9 St Bavo Cathedral 89 m, Ghent (B) 32.6 km
10 KBC Artevelde Tower 119 m, Ghent (B), 36.9 km
11 Sea canal Ghent-Terneuzen
12 Saint Vincent Church 93.5 m, Eeklo (B), 25 km
13 Biggest sea lock on the canal for the moment, 1.6 km
14 Drive in to 6.6 km long Westerscheldt tunnel, 2.4 km
15 Bruges Belfry and Church of Our Lady not visible but about here, 46 km
16 Terneuzen center 500 m
17 Coordination center sea locks
18 Town hall Terneuzen 250 m
19 Dow Chemical, Terneuzen, 3.2 km

Details

Location: Terneuzen Waterfront (70 m)      by: Mentor Depret
Area: Netherlands      Date: 2017 10 13
This is the S to W view in real perspective of the Terneuzen area from the Waterfront building. Because of continuous backlight at the land side of the building, I awaited a slightly cloudy day but with good visibility. As such small details on the horizon remain quite well visible.
The Terneuzen area of course has everything to do with the sea canal of Ghent-Terneuzen and its industrial activity but nevertheless looks quite green with many trees along the roads. The farthest recognizable objects - but not visible on this pano - are the Belfry and 115 m high Church of Our Lady in Bruges (B) (second highest brick tower in the world), 46 km away. However Gent city (B)(30-35km) and the many polluting industries along the canal in Belgium are well visible.


Canon Eos M6 with EF-M 18-150mm, 12 pics, 48 mm (76.8 mm KB) iso 125, F6.3, 1/80 s, stitched with PTGuiPro, 34308x3681 px 38.5MB jpeg, downsized 4660x500 px 1.4MB jpeg

Rating

Average rating:  (4,000 based on 5 ratings, Score: 3,667)
My rating:  To rate a panorama or to see your given rating you have to login first.

Comments

thx for the two ratings Giuseppe and Jan.
The fact that I get only 2 ratings for what is a very realistic, informative and technically correct pano with exact colors, shows how ridiculous this rating system is.
2017/10/18 23:20, Mentor Depret
Hi Mentor. I have often discussed this problem with Alberto. My opinion is that often the rating does not match the real value of the panos.
At best, it corresponds to the average tastes of the partecipant. In worst cases, it corresponds to favor exchanges.
That said, you should not give too much importance to the rating and you were wrong to judge too severely Silas's pano.
Let's avoid, as Arne said, Star Wars.

Apart from these considerations, I like much this pano. But, generally, city views are, in my opinion, underrated.
2017/10/19 09:56, Giuseppe Marzulli
4 Stars for the pano, but I don't like your disrespectful comments and ratings even for Klaus and Silas lately.
2017/10/20 14:19, Steffen Minack
@ Steffen. Sorry but your remark feels quite insulting. I argued why I didn't like the pano, is that disrespectful? I do not want to make a polemic but look what you wrote on my pano 21940. Is that respectful? And giving *no* rating at all, which is even less than 1,2 or 3 stars, is even more disrespectful because this means not worth to rate.
2017/10/20 23:36, Mentor Depret
To the pano: Interesting pair together with the evening view. Both well done.

To the discussion: You may not have followed some of the arguments we had here some time ago. The result was that we have established using either 4 stars or no rating at all. That's just the way it now is here and it doesn't help to go through all of that again. No rating at all is different from zero stars, and is considered a "comment". We all feel that constructive criticism in comments is more apprecaiative of other people's work than "down-rating" them with zero to three stars. Explicitely stating in a comment why you don't like something is more than welcome with most of us.

Cheers, Martin
2017/10/21 14:21, Martin Kraus
thx Martin, I was not aware about the change of the rating system. I only followed the instructions of the website. So this means a pano has only to be rated as: 'I like or I don't'?
2017/10/21 19:02, Mentor Depret
Hej Mentor. It is difficult to explain, but the ratingsystem is based on a complex calculation. That means, that a 3 or less stars rating de facto devaluate unproportional much, compared to no vote. I once had a pano with many stars, but a troll gave it one star, and is therefore the badest rated panos except for testpanos etc. It has a rating much lower than this, in spite of many 4stars. A primitive and simple adding of given stars in the rating would be much better, and would invite to differentiated voting. Since our host since long has been silent, it is not likely to change. Anyway, it is therefore much gentler to not vote, and still utter critisism. Then one can try to improve the pano. If I give bad ratings, I base it on more objective problems like big stitchingerrors, large burned out parts extreme low dynamics etc. I ret to avoid devaluating due to lack of interest, taste in colours, cultural dogmas etc.
2017/10/21 19:26, Jan Lindgaard Rasmussen
Dear Jan, I think this rating system: 4 stars or nothing has degraded itself to: I like or I don't like the pano, thus a pure sentimental and worthless judging. My next pano will prove this...
2017/10/22 00:41, Mentor Depret

Leave a comment


Mentor Depret

More panoramas

... in the vicinity 
... in the top 100