Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Butchers creek - omeo07.jpg

Nominate -- Zanimum 13:09, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Gnangarra 13:16, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose bright parts (especially the running water) overexposed, long exposure time makes the water look unnatural MGo 13:46, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Overexposition on some leaves. Composition is nice. There's nothing wrong for me with the unnatural water. Francisco M. Marzoa 15:57, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - agree with MGo on blurred water - MPF 23:57, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Of course you can like it or not, but there's nothing intrinsically wrong with blurred water. I've seen this comment before, so I link to a NG tutorial explaining that blurring motion in general -and water in particular- is not wrong, but just another view of the same scene: [1] [2] Francisco M. Marzoa 09:58, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I don't like it, because it is not as the eye sees it, so it looks unreal and unnatural. If there's nothing wrong with blurred water, then there's nothing wrong with blurred anything! And blurred pics generally don't win being featured . . . MPF 14:42, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment That's a fallacy, indeed. Bluring motion is usual in professional photography. You should read the articles linked. Francisco M. Marzoa 05:18, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment unnatural water from a long exposures has been accepted before even as recently as image:Jonathan's Run Falls.jpg promoted earlier this month. Gnangarra 14:09, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2 support, 6 oppose --> not featured Roger McLassus 19:52, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Navigation menu