Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Anthemis April 2010-1.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Anthemis April 2010-1.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2010 at 12:26:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info Flower of a Yellow Chamomile: composition on yellow, green and violet. I'm amazed with the exuberance of Spring this year! Everything by Alvesgaspar (talk) 12:26, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 12:26, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Colour looks un-natural. --Lawboy25 (talk) 13:43, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment -- I suppose you mean unnatural. But no, the colours were not manipulated meaning that you may have your monitor uncalibrated (or your eyes untrained). -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:59, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
- Comment Or perhaps the photographer is not as good as he thinks. --Lawboy25 (talk) 12:09, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- Comment -- Don't you have anything more useful to do than systematically oppose my nominatios ([1])? Apparently not, since the suggestion I made in your userpage to go out and use the camera, and observe the work of others in order to learn, was obviously declined. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 12:30, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- CommentMy comments are based only on merit. Unfortunately, you take many photos but the quality is not as good as you pretend especially since your photos are staged and highly manipulated. I suggest you learn that photography is about representation not idealization. --Lawboy25 (talk) 14:44, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- Comment I suggest that Alvesgaspar stop harrassing people that oppose his pictures and stop his arrogant patronizing stance as to the photographic ability of participants, as if his photographic ability were beyond reproach. On top of that, he does not seem to hold himself to the same standards that he demands from others. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 02:35, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- Comment I agree totally with Tomascastelazo. --Lawboy25 (talk) 12:20, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful! --Mbz1 (talk) 15:49, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
- Support --The High Fin Sperm Whale 17:10, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose No value for me. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 19:59, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
- Support Good composition, great use of color. Steven Walling 21:51, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
- Comment Location? Native, or naturalised, or cultivated? - MPF (talk) 00:17, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- Info -- The picture is now georeferenced. As far as I know this species is natural to the Mediterranean and southern Europe, including Portugal. This particular plant is growing wild in a disturbed ground inside Lisbon, together with some other species of yellow Asterales: Calendula arvensis, Glebionis coronaria, Colestephus myconis, Hieracium sp., Sonchus sp. and others. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 00:31, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- Support Thanks! That definitely makes it worthy of support - MPF (talk) 01:02, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:43, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose Oversaturated colours and flower macro do not make a featured. inisheer (talk) 10:23, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose. Yeah, it is a flower it is nice. But this is a fairly standard shot and does not wow me anymore. --Dschwen (talk) 16:06, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- Comment -- Wow and alleluia, it seems you finally surrendered to the expressiveness of the 'no wow' reason for opposing ;-) -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:05, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- Yeap, I have caved in and I've become bitter. No seriously, I can't see anymore flowers. They are intrinsically pretty but the subject gets old. Yes, it does. It feels like a cookie-cutter image, done exactly according to recipe. There is nothing new about it and we already featured tons of flowers. --Dschwen (talk) 00:06, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- You can't see them anymore and I'm still fascinated with their beauty and variety. Especially this Spring. It rained a lot (it is still raining in Portugal) and there is an explosion of wild flowers with exquisite colors, most of them unknown to me. Coming here is the way I find to share that experience. In this particular picture it was the contrast between the colours in the foreground and bkg that caught my attention. Mostlty aesthetics and little to do with the flower itself. Yeap, I know that you tune up with a different tuning fork... -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 00:45, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, and it is just my opinion, I'm sure lots of people will like the picture. I'd be interested to see the explosion of wildflowers in more originally framed shots. And for the record I do not think the colors look unnatural. --Dschwen (talk) 01:07, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- You can't see them anymore and I'm still fascinated with their beauty and variety. Especially this Spring. It rained a lot (it is still raining in Portugal) and there is an explosion of wild flowers with exquisite colors, most of them unknown to me. Coming here is the way I find to share that experience. In this particular picture it was the contrast between the colours in the foreground and bkg that caught my attention. Mostlty aesthetics and little to do with the flower itself. Yeap, I know that you tune up with a different tuning fork... -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 00:45, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- Yeap, I have caved in and I've become bitter. No seriously, I can't see anymore flowers. They are intrinsically pretty but the subject gets old. Yes, it does. It feels like a cookie-cutter image, done exactly according to recipe. There is nothing new about it and we already featured tons of flowers. --Dschwen (talk) 00:06, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- Support --99of9 (talk) 03:16, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose - nice photo of a nice flower, but another stem in background is a bit distracting. Not quite enough wow for featured. Jonathunder (talk) 15:02, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose Although the quality is good, this picture is too ordinary to be featured to me. --Dein Freund der Baum (talk) 22:49, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 17:03, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
