Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Kreuzspinne front Sep06.jpg

Image:Kreuzspinne front Sep06.jpg

•  Info European garden spider with prey. created, uploaded and nominated by Dschwen
•  Comment. Like any other macro shot it has a limited depth of field. I focussed on the jaws and body, and despite parts of the legs having a fairly soft focus I think the picture provides sufficient detail (check full size).

original version (left) - not featured

•  Support Dschwen 11:40, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
•  Support can we just have the scientific name too, please? -- Lycaon 15:42, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
  •  Comment. That would be Araneus diadematus. --Dschwen 16:11, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
•  Support Extremely detailed photograph. -- eboy 16:21, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
•  Oppose darkness, and why not f8? Darkone 08:50, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
  • f8 makes no difference, trust me, and exposure mandated 6.3 at that distance with flash. And the subject isn't dark. I wanted to create a non distracting background. --Dschwen 09:20, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
•  Oppose Of course I wasn't there and do not know the circunstances in which the picture was taken and may be you cant do that, but I still think like Darkone that a lower aperture with larger exposition time had been better. Francisco M. Marzoa 12:24, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
•  Support Good detail. Although the background could be a bit lighter for perfect shot... --Leclerc 01:35, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
•  Oppose Nice picture, but the background is way too dark. --Grombo 14:33, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
•  Support great shot, nice colors. Dori | Talk 03:41, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
•  Oppose I am sure that a lower aperture with longer exposition time and extern lighting instead of flash would have resulted in a better picture. Roger McLassus 06:21, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
•  Oppose - dead pixels. Ad advisers: Unless you have actually tried it with the same camera, or computed the transfer function including diffraction, you should not give such advice. --Wikimol 14:27, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
•  Comment so in summary the opposes are based on

1. I dont't like dark blue
2. I think a different apperture would have been better
3. Dead pixels

The latter is surely fixable, but the rest strikes me as purely subjective and/or uninformed. Sorry! --Dschwen 09:52, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

• In case I am wrong and you've made the best picture possible with your camera in this situaton, then you've done a commendable job, which I underestimated because I was "uninformed". But even this assumption would not enhance this picture's quality. It would still not reach FP-quality (in my subjective view, admittedly, but, alas, I have no other. Nor has anyone else.) Roger McLassus 14:28, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

•  Oppose The problem is not the colour of the background but its effect on the constrast of the image. Also, some parts of the spider are not focused. Alvesgaspar 20:56, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Aha! Thank you, that's a comment which ich a lot more usefull for me. The bg looke fine to me on the screens I used (en:FPC has a paragraph on that). But I can see how the edit enhances the contrast. I can't do anything abt. focus at least not with my camera, and I seriously doubt that anyone here can create macro shots with significantly higher DOF. --Dschwen 09:28, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
  • With this (difficult)angle and light you don't have enough depth-of-field!... --Alvesgaspar 13:10, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Light was no limiting factor. The angle was choice, there are lots of boring top down pictures already, I wanted to add a different perspective. --Dschwen 17:08, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

5 support, 6 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 06:34, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

edited version (right) - not featured

•  Comment I added a new version. I tried to make the spider a bit more visible. In general i think the shot is really good and of a good quality.--AngMoKio 21:44, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
•  Oppose DoF problem persist and you've create a lot of new noise on this version. Francisco M. Marzoa 23:56, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Day 7: 0 support, 1 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 12:26, 12 October 2006 (UTC)