Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Chicoreus orchidiflorus 01.JPG

File:Chicoreus orchidiflorus 01.JPG, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 May 2019 at 10:25:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Chicoreus orchidiflorus 01.JPG Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Chicoreus orchidiflorus 01.JPG

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Bones, shells and fossils
•  Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 10:25, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- Llez (talk) 10:25, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
•  Support - A gorgeous shell and one of your best shell pictures yet. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:50, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Podzemnik (talk) 11:09, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
•  Support Cmao20 (talk) 13:06, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
•  Neutral I know that Llez does terrific work but seeing that his shell nominations rarely get critiques I will step forward to throw the first stone ;) Resolution is good, I measured that each view has about 12 MP of the possible 15 MP which is good given that you'd want to use the center area of the lens. My first real issue is the sharpening, as the structures of the shell with the very soft lighting are not easy to distinguish. More sharpening shows detail better and improves depth perception a bit. Have you tried a more directional lighting setup instead of this soft one? Secondly, the contour of the shells is too blurred, which might be caused by how you isolate the background or it's just out of focus in capture. Out of focus would be bad, but later blurring would be quite fixable. I don't want to oppose this out of respect, but for me personally such studio shots have a higher bar of quality because of the controlled environment and I think you could do much better. – Lucas 13:12, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Comment Please remember, that this shell has only 2,7 cm in length --Llez (talk) 13:16, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

•  Comment Still, I've worked with the MP-E 60 mm lens—which I suppose you are using—with focus stacking and was able to get better results. If you aren't focus stacking than that might be a limiting factor. – Lucas 13:26, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

•  Support.--Vulphere 13:29, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:30, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- Eatcha (Talk-Page) 18:08, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
•  Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 23:44, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --BoothSift 01:49, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Schnobby (talk) 06:40, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:23, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:05, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Cart (talk) 08:51, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
•  Support Poco² 13:11, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:42, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 05:55, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
•  Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:21, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:57, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:02, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 06:39, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 10:13, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:18, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Bones, shells and fossils