Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Cichorium intybus-alvesgaspar1.jpg

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

Image:Cichorium intybus-alvesgaspar1.jpg, featured[edit]

Cichorium intybus

  •  Info I was amazed by the beauty of this wild flower of common chicory when I took a walk this morning near my house. All three nominations of today are the result of that short walk. After every shot I'm more convinced that "recognizing beauty" is a major skill in photography, maybe more important than technique and good hardware. Created and nominated by Alvesgaspar --Alvesgaspar 15:03, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Uhm, yeah, very profound. But while you walk around recognizing beauty it wouldn't hurt keeping the project scope in mind too. Flower pictures are more useful if the whole plant can be seen. This just as a side rant... --Dschwen 16:44, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Not exactely so. The scientific approach to Nature is to not the only one and probably not the most important for people coming here looking for flowers. That is true in general and also in which the Commons' project is concerned. Besides, everyone serves the project according to his capacities and preferences (you seem to have forgotten the wisdom of honourable Dr. Marx about the subject). Just imagine someone claiming that your building pictures, to be complete, should also emphasize the engineering details. - Alvesgaspar 18:33, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Even if we assumed for a second that commons is based on a marxist philosophy, I still doubt that the honorable Dr. Marx would advocate tons of flower bud pictures among the FPs. Compared to their usefulness they are waaaaaay overrepresented. And as for the my building pictures, you got to give me some credit here, there is a little more variety in the pics I upload to commons than just building pictures. --Dschwen 19:03, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • Well tons of flower pictures among FPs is a function of picky reviewers, not Alvesgaspar as a photographer. This image failed with a glorious total of 6 votes and this failed miserably, despite being sharp and of high quality, mostly because they were "boring". Oh and don't forget these images which got a whole two support votes including the nominator (myself) and no opposition. This image is a landmark: it's not just a small flower head, but leaves as well and should become a featured picture. Amazing. I'm not convinced that many reviewers even care about usefulness. At most it is secondary to other aspects. Your comment is misplaced and should be geared at the reviewers, not this photogapher. -- Ram-Man 20:10, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
          • Point taken, I partially agree about the reviewer thing. But the nominatior takes some responsibility as well, especially if it is a self-nom. The reviewers only review whats presented to them. Non-self noms are a rarity (only 4 in the first 35 on this page, even less if you discount mutual courtesy nominations). Anywho, I suspect the new Meet the photographers thingie is a big incentive for even more self-noms now. I'm not saying its a bad thing per se, but the nominator definitely bears responsibility on what he presents as his share of allegedly the best work on commons. --Dschwen 20:48, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • If we're having side rants, I get criticized for citing project scope when I oppose low-resolution files. As for the point, trying to get a featured picture of a plant that doesn't have a flower is nearly impossible, even if it is technically flawless. Flower images like this *are* useful, because they show in detail the flower itself. A good encyclopedia article would have closeups of each important part (leaves, buds, flowers, stems, roots, etc...) while having another picture of the entire plant. As for featured pictures though, it's just not possible to get featured pictures of everything that a good article needs, due to current standards. A picture without some form of beauty (or anti-beauty on the other extreme) doesn't become a FP. -- Ram-Man 18:47, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Alvesgaspar 15:03, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose -- The angle of the stem, somehow makes the flower look crooked and off center. The the background is not in focus, it is distracting. Further (beauty is in the eye of the beholder) there is no "wow" effect for me. {Charlessauer 17:26, 22 May 2007 (UTC).}[reply]
  •  Support I can't agree more with bit on "recognizing beauty". This is a beautiful image, and I don't seem to mind that it has a centered composition. It certainly doesn't hurt though that your camera can reproduce these blues much better than saturated yellow and red. -- Ram-Man 15:24, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Thermos 20:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --MichaelMaggs 21:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Jina Lee 05:43, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Jon Harald Søby 20:41, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Vmenkov 04:37, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support /Daniel78 20:12, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support--Javier ME 16:34, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer 06:36, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Image:Cichorium_intybus-alvesgaspar1.jpg&oldid=5887214"