Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Tiigi klaasiksääsevastne.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

File:Tiigi klaasiksääsevastne.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Feb 2024 at 11:36:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Chaoboridae larvae
  • Agree with Charles it's a shame to be unable to fix stacking errors due to the fact that RAW pictures were sent to garbage -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:10, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I fixed the stacking errors.
    I disagree about keeping the raw material.
    I have already explained once how much space it would take. I don't see any point in keeping files that I almost never need. Digital garbage is already a big problem in the world today, and producing on top of it is not a sensible thing to do. Janeklass (talk) 04:26, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reading "it is not possible for me to fix this error" / "RAW pictures were sent to garbage" suggests that the stacking error would never be fixed -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:02, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I must have rushed the answer a bit. I thought it would be necessary to restack, but there was no need. Janeklass (talk) 05:07, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • HDD external hard drives between 8 and 14 TB cost between $100 and $200 in 2024. Much less expensive than camera equipment or microscope. And certainly enough space to archive RAW pictures for 5-10 years -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:13, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm sorry, but my vision of that time is different. Now that I think about it carefully, I even have some raw files from 2011. I have never opened them since the first time. They just consume space somewhere in the cloud. In my opinion, a hard drive is not a safe solution anyway, many things can happen to them. I keep my files in the cloud.
    By the way, HDD is an outdated technology today. Janeklass (talk) 05:26, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I still see possible issues, though I don't know if they're stacking problems or in the original. What accounts for some areas of blur on the bottom of the creature? Motion blur such that we can't see the cilia there? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:16, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Microscope lenses are used in photomicrography, the dof of microscope lenses is very small. It is very difficult to get every little hair in focus and it is not always successful. It is very difficult to find that right stacking step length. You can't take too many shots, otherwise you'll have too much overlap, and if you take too few shots, you might end up with blurry areas. This problem has probably arisen because these hairs have not been brought into focus. I don't think it's a problem. The overall appearance of the character is nicely seen and that's enough. Janeklass (talk) 06:39, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Thanks. It's a remarkable photo. I'd love to see an entire individual, but this is already quite obviously worth a feature, in my estimation. I would have left the bubble in the photo, though. I don't see why you should have to eliminate those all the time. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:16, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 13:09, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Diptera#Others
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Tiigi_klaasiksääsevastne.jpg&oldid=855714827"