Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:David Coulthard Red Bull Donut 20015.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:David Coulthard Red Bull Donut 20015.jpg, not featured
[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Apr 2019 at 00:58:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: [[Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles]]
Info All by Nikhil B -- Nikhil B (talk) 00:58, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
Support -- Nikhil B (talk) 00:58, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
Oppose Blown highlights and I don't find this powder really magic -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:20, 30 March 2019 (UTC)- Oppose - Bad quality. what is the interest of the scene? --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 09:49, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose Given the particular angle of the shot, not showing much of the driver, and that this was a show run rather than a real race, the magic isn't really there for me.--Peulle (talk) 12:33, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose Not a bad photo, but I don't think it's better than most other racing shots. Cmao20 (talk) 14:05, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose Could be better. --BoothSift 01:48, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose What's up with those green-ish looking rectangles around specular highlights? What's up with that yellow glow around the nose and top air intake? Why does the photographer at the left (next to the striped dress) have pink arms but skin-colored hands, and why is the transition between them so sharp? Why does the transition from smoke to shadows in that area go pink → grey → black like that? In general: why are there such sharp borders between yellow/purple/pink/shadow areas and why are they so straight? It's an interesting shot, but something must have gone wrong here during processing. --14:12, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
- Info El Grafo: What you see and describe is a classic example of when the
chromatic aberration settings in for example Lightroom are set to the wrong variables. The program can't make the distinction between actual pink/magenta or green/cyan and the CA version of it. The program overcompensates with these angular grey areas and sometimes even other colors. I wonder if this photo would not be better without any CA compensation at all. The author has probably just used the CA settings out of habit or by default and got all these mishaps in the photo. In cases like this it can be better to just go over the photo manually and replace any small CAs with the replace color tool/brush in say Photoshop instead of using the automatic tool. BTW, fun fact: The rectangles around the highlights that you describe as greenish are actually grey. (check it with a drop tool), but since they are surrounded by magenta, your brain will register them as slightly greenish, which is the Complementary color to magenta. Trick of the eyes. :-) --Cart (talk) 14:38, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
- @W.carter: That's interesting, thanks for the explanation! My first thought was manual editing with a large brush, but I soon realized that the patterns are way too straight for that. I've never experienced this myself, but it's not difficult to imagine a CA removal tool getting confused by this kind of image. (An yeah, there's a reason I wrote "green-ish looking" instead of just "green" ;-p)--El Grafo (talk) 14:59, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
- The first version of the photo has none of these mishaps, they must have been made when the photo was brightened. --Cart (talk) 15:21, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose per others and the processing errors mentioned by El Grafo – Lucas 20:04, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 00:43, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 8 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /– Lucas 11:46, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
