Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Snowflake macro photography 1.jpg

File:Snowflake macro photography 1.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2018 at 18:43:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Snowflake macro photography 1.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Snowflake macro photography 1.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena
•  Info created and uploaded by Alexey Kljatov, nominated by Yann -- Yann (talk) 18:43, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
•  Support Impressive quality and lovely colors. -- Yann (talk) 18:43, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Cart (talk) 18:58, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --GeXeS (talk) 22:06, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
•  Support Wow (I can just see this being used as an Internet meme to taunt people perceived as being too sensitive ) Daniel Case (talk) 05:16, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
•  Info Tilted. Could it be rotated a little bit? ---donald- (talk) 07:02, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

•  Support -- -donald- (talk) 08:45, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

•  Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:21, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
•  Support Is this real? --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:29, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
•  Comment Real, but very heavily processed and the flake should be rotated. Charles (talk) 10:45, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

•  Question - When you say it's heavily processed, do you think any of the colors were altered? I'm inclined to support but would like to read your answer (or anyone else's answer). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:20, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

• Snowflakes don't have any color, so the color comes from the light source which is rather pleasant here. The enthusiastic processing is from noise reduction and amplified contrast and such things. Compare with this. Although I suspect that some of the very smooth edges comes from it starting to melt a bit. There are also a lot of small bubbles on it, suggesting that some liquid is present. --Cart (talk) 07:49, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

• Thanks.  Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:28, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

•  Info The author hasn't been active for years so I took the liberty of rotating the flake. Please revert if you don't like it. --Cart (talk) 11:21, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Famberhorst (talk) 19:12, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
•  Support per rotators. Thank you, Cart. --Basotxerri (talk) 19:41, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --XRay ^talk 20:15, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Msaynevirta (talk) 22:42, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:18, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:40, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
•  Comment I'm close to oppose this one but staying neutral because it's a difficult subject. The crop is too large IMO, with uninteresting background (like here) and a square framing would have been much better. The resolution is very small, only acceptable perhaps considering the size of a snow flake (I think a few millimeters). I also find the post-treatment too strong, making the object artificial : there are heavy dark lines at the borders that would never appear in a standard photograph. Noise reduction is also visible -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:24, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:03, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural phenomena