Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/November-2005
| Featured picture tools |
|---|
Please cut and paste new entries to the bottom of this page, creating a new monthly archive (by closing date) when necessary.
A graceful picture of soybeans in the pod. Crisply focused and artfully composed.
- Nominate and support. - Denni☯ 04:04, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
- Fixed nomination header. A {{NowCommons}} template won't work in a header. - 131.211.51.34 07:37, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
- Not too sure about this. It's nice, but a tad small for a still life. Colors/Balance tho are tweaked to give it a nice warm hue. Also, what's the liscencing information?~Cliffhanger407 03:08, October 19, 2005 (UTC)
- USDA image. Hence, public domain. Denni☯ 22:59, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
- For the record, I don't think its necessarily tweaked. golden hour will do this to a photo. Sometimes this is distracting but I don't have a problem with this one. Diliff 23:08, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
- Neutral. It's a nice, clear image, but the colours are a little off-putting. Enochlau 02:24, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
Support Clear --Fir0002 07:24, 23 October 2005 (UTC)- Support. Not ideally high res but not bad either. Very demonstrative of soybeans though. Diliff 09:46, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
Not promoted Raven4x4x 05:10, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
Ok, first off, it's probably bad featured pictures etiquette to add two of your own pictures at once, but I honestly couldn't decide. I love them both so much. Normally, I wouldn't do this unless someone else suggested it first (as in the Crepuscular Rays nomination.)
Anyway, these pictures appear in the article Morning glory. I believe they truly capure the stunning beauty of a morning glory flower. And the water drops (that's real rain, not water sprayed from a bottle!) only enhance the effect.
- Nominate and support. - PiccoloNamek 14:46, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
- Sorry to start the comments with something negative, and I know you are a skilled photographer, but I don't like the loss of focus on the near edge of the flower, in both photos. So I could not support - Adrian Pingstone 19:03, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
- No problem. I wouldn't be phased even if every single person voted oppose. You can't win em all, no reason to get all down about it. Although I must say, stopping down to the maximum aperture in the 7:30AM light wasn't really an option, especially without a macro-tripod. ;( And I personally think the focus in the second picture draws the eye towards the white center, and the stripes running into it, but that's just me. =0PiccoloNamek 19:35, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
- Support, especially the second one. I just love the colour of these flowers, I should get some for my own garden. Raven4x4x 10:16, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
- Support second one. Impressive. Glaurung 07:19, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
- ( + ) Support Second version only. I totallay agree with Piccolo in that the focus on the picture draws the eye towards the center. --Fir0002 07:26, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
- Oppose - because the forward parts of the flower are slightly blurrred - Adrian Pingstone 08:03, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
- Neutral to first (out of focus bit not that bad, and the picture is ok), whereas oppose to second (out of focus bit in your face, uncomfortable crop). Enochlau 11:11, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
- Support either. The tight crop is artistic and appealing. Rhobite 22:53, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
- Support, first picture only. The second picture does not show the entire flower and is too detailed, regardless of its artistic merit.Jeeb 04:04, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
Promoted Image:BlueMorningGloryClose.jpg Raven4x4x 00:40, 5 November 2005 (UTC)