Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Brachypelma auratum 2009 G04.jpg

File:Brachypelma auratum 2009 G04.jpg, featured

Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2009 at 07:45:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Brachypelma auratum 2009 G04.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Brachypelma auratum 2009 G04.jpg

•  Info All by George Chernilevsky (talk) 07:45, 24 August 2009 (UTC) - nominated by --George Chernilevsky (talk) 07:45, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Info Mexican flameknee birdeater (Brachypelma auratum). Big female. Rare, large and poisonous spider. The first scientific description is created in 1993 only.
•  Support --George Chernilevsky (talk) 07:45, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Very nice picture. Unfortunately the light comes from the wrong direction. Also the dark areas look a bit grainy. --NEUROtiker ^⇌ 08:57, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose harsh lighting, too much lost in the shadows. --Dschwen (talk) 13:57, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Thanks both for comment. I nominate other variant --George Chernilevsky (talk) 16:18, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
• Regretful  Oppose DOF is too shallow (see near legs). Amazing (and I mean it) composition, though. The footprints in the sand are fantastic. Composition-wise, this is one of the best spider shots on Commons. -- JovanCormac 17:40, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
  • On second thought, the composition, especially the intimidating footprints, is simply too amazing to oppose. So I change my vote to a weak  Support. If such a great composition isn't a mitigating reason, I don't know what is. -- JovanCormac 17:42, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Support This one is not as good as the one above, but still good. Julielangford (talk) 09:39, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Support I like the footprints and the warmer colours of this one. --Korall (talk) 17:29, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Support This composition is better (imho) --Dmitry Rozhkov (talk) 08:14, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per others. —kallerna™ 12:13, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Lighting is ok for me, e.g. the majority of the back is exposed to light. The only minor drawbacks for me are the camera limitations (noise at base ISO, sharpness fall-off towards border) but especially subject and composition are good enough for FP. In the long run your contributions would technically benefit from a DSLR. --Iotatau (talk) 11:09, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /JovanCormac]]) 12:52, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Not featured, instead File:Brachypelma auratum 2009 G03.jpg is featured which has the better support/oppose ratio. See Commons_talk:Featured_picture_candidates#How_far_does_the_rule_of_.22two_versions.22_go.3F for details. -- JovanCormac 13:24, 4 September 2009 (UTC)