Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Tachina grossa3. 2006-08-18.jpg

Info created by Algirdas - uploaded by Algirdas - nominated by Username --Algirdas 18:49, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Algirdas 18:49, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support second picture (right) seems ok, except for flash light reflex on its back Ziga 19:04, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Please only nominate one version at the time. Lycaon 19:08, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hugo.arg 20:09, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Renata3 23:44, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose compression artefacts, oversharpening and poor lighting mixpix 23:56, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Obviously, author has a lot to shoot but is limited by his equipment. I bet the lack of sharpness and odd colours (common to all his pics) come from the camera and not the photographer. Benh 07:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm not so sure... the Nikon 8800 has manual focus, custom white balance, ISO50, RAW, image stabilisation and ED glass. If you set it up right, it can really perform. I suspect the problems with these images come mostly from them being shot JPEG and set to AWB under mixed lighting. Shooting macro this way is asking for trouble, as you're bound to look as close as possible. mixpix 09:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment You must be right. But from the size/resolution ratio of the author's picture, I would say his final jpegs are in the higher side of quality (but the source image may be bad already). So there must be some point in his "chain" where something isn't done right because given the 8 mpix of his camera and the relatively low resolution of the final pictures, details per pixel should be good. And this isn't only because he was shooting macro in some supposedly bad conditions (I don't think conditions were bad on his branch pic below). Algirdas if you hear me, are your pictures cropped or sampled down? Benh 22:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose None of them has enough photographic quality for FP. Please separate the nominations. Alvesgaspar 09:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Metoc 14:29, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rtz 12:53, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --donald- 17:51, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Agree to Alvegaspar. --Atoma 18:52, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Karelj 21:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

result: 5 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 07:11, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Navigation menu