Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2017 Polaroid Supercolor 1000.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:2017 Polaroid Supercolor 1000.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Mar 2017 at 21:10:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
Info All by me -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 21:10, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
Support -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 21:10, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
Comment A perfectly good and sharp enough product photo that we certainly need, but imagine if there would have been a Polaroid photo emerging from the slot. That would have been the little extra detail that could have made this a slam-dunk FP for me. This is one of the few cameras where you have the perfect excuse for doing something different/fun/action-y with it. Just a thought... --cart-Talk 22:23, 7 March 2017 (UTC)- Support although cart's idea does sound worth trying. Daniel Case (talk) 04:13, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
Oppose I'm missing some wow factor here, something that also hinders myself from nominating more of my neutral product photographs here. Per cart, a photo (showing the photographer perhaps?) would have been a different thing entirely. Also the white background is not the best choice for the white-ish parts of the camera, the subject doesn't stand out enough in my view. I also would have liked to see more of the flash bulb, part of a prominent part of the camera, as it is there is too much obscured by a reflection, which could have been avoided by placing a dark surface. – LucasT 07:36, 8 March 2017 (UTC)- Oppose Lack of wow. If you are going for the on-white Argos Catalogue look, then it has to be spotless. This kind of image, mundane subject with unexciting presentation, really has to shine technically to wow me. See User:Evan-Amos's work, which is all generally superior to this, and "among our finest" is the criteria for FP. -- Colin (talk) 08:12, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
- Support -- Thennicke (talk) 09:08, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
- Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 08:00, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose - I agree with the critics. This is a very good VI/QI, but not an FP, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:16, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
- Support lNeverCry 04:25, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
- Support Per others --Palauenc05 (talk) 18:19, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /lNeverCry 22:47, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
