Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2016 Minolta Dynax 404si.JPG
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:2016 Minolta Dynax 404si.JPG, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 May 2016 at 17:53:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
Info All by me -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 17:53, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Support -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 17:53, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Oppose Not FP level. The felt (?) surface, while seamless, is really distracting like noise. Unless the surface/background has some attractive qualities of its own, I think it needs to make itself invisible to the viewer. The camera isn't clean. I appreciate this is not brand new, but we have other vintage camera photos that are much better prepared than this. It's tedious, but makes a big difference. The lighting appears to be available light rather than arranged softened flash/strobe lighting. The consequence is we see your room in the lens reflection, rather than simple shapes of light that highlight the lens curvature. The body lacks the 3D form that arranged lighting would achieve. The colour temperature is perhaps a little warm. And the "face" of the camera is the "Minolta" logo which is in shadow. Compare this and this. I suggest also to angle the camera a little more and cropping more on all sides apart from the left. I suspect it won't be easy to make the plastic metal-effect body look as cool as a metal body or superior plastics. -- Colin (talk) 19:05, 20 May 2016 (UTC)- Mild Oppose - The camera itself looks a bit noisy at full size. I might feel a bit nitpicky, except that the photos Colin links are persuasively better than this. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:49, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Colin. INeverCry 01:21, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Colin. ~ Moheen (talk) 19:52, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Colin. Not well served by the dark background. Daniel Case (talk) 04:16, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination --Jacek Halicki (talk) 11:02, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 05:03, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
