Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Leitz Prado BW 1.JPG
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Leitz Prado BW 1.JPG, featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Feb 2010 at 15:47:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created - uploaded - nominated by -- Berthold Werner (talk) 15:47, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Support -- Berthold Werner (talk) 15:47, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Neutral
- Tried to remove the dust. --Berthold Werner (talk) 08:56, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- Support now -- MJJR (talk) 19:48, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- weak support getting wow from a topic like this is really challeging. But I think you have done what can be done within reasonable limits to illustrate this dias projector. I like the illumination of the projector and the light of the carefully selected background and the composition. As mentioned there is some dirt on the table/dust spots, which should be fixable. I don't know if the small overexposed areas could have been solved using HDR? The reason for my weak support is that I don't quite see as much wow as for most other FPs. Going to the extreme with details, one could also have hidden the ugly power cable with a hole behind the projecter. On the other hand that could have given the impression of a wireless projector... --Slaunger (talk) 20:57, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Really good illustration and certainly a Quality Image, but no WOW-factor. Admittedly that's mission impossible, but still. Kleuske (talk) 23:07, 24 January 2010 (UTC)- Support Per Slaunger. I think it would have been difficult to do this much better, and I actually find this picture quite pleasing to the eye. Composition and lighting are great and the cable was also included in a harmonious way to the compositon (I think it´s good it´s depicted in the scene). Whether this image should be a FP depends to a great deal on personal opinion, as with the nominated car below (only this machine can claim more historic value). IMO it is a very good product picture and will be a great addition to any wikipedia article, creating interest in the subject. Nikopol (talk) 00:27, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- Support Great image, perfect composition, high encyclopedic value - as was said. And for me it is more than enough. Masur (talk) 09:11, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- Support This is a technical picture, there is no need for any WOW-effect. MatthiasKabel (talk) 11:11, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose This is FP-nomination, so there is a need for WOW-effect. —kallerna™ 12:13, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- Support Great image, per Masur --George Chernilevsky talk 14:00, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- I do understand the opposes however I also agree with MatthiasKabel Support --Herby talk thyme 16:06, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- Support Technically excellent (device and image). Per Herby. --Cayambe (talk) 19:42, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- Support: apparently uncomplicated composition. For next time please note that jpg in the lower case is the preferred file extension; Image titles and file names on the English Wikipedia (commons refers to the various language Wikipedias for these guidelines). Snowmanradio (talk) 20:51, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- Support: --Michael Gäbler (talk) 01:33, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Comment You might have better luck on a wikipedia, if you can connect the image to an article. NativeForeigner (talk) 07:05, 27 January 2010 (UTC)- Support --Phyrexian (talk) 16:33, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
- Support: very nice, and I think it has a "quiet" wow. Jonathunder (talk) 18:35, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
- Support: --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 12:51, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 20:06, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects
