Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Chain moray eel.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Chain moray eel.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2015 at 12:22:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish
Info created and uploaded by Atsme, nominated by Verde78 -- Verde78 (talk) 12:22, 29 October 2015 (UTC)- Info Chain moray eel under a feather duster. The eel was hiding deep inside a crevice in a coral reef at around 40 ft (12 m) deep. It peeked out long enough for the shot. Location was the Dutch Caribbean about 100 ft (30 m) out from the coastline of Bonaire. Atsme😊Consult 01:42, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Support -- Verde78 (talk) 12:22, 29 October 2015 (UTC)- Support Atsme☯Consult 12:38, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Comment Nice view, but not sharp at all at maximum resolution. --Tremonist (talk) 15:54, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Oppose Peer Tremonist --The Photographer (talk) 16:58, 29 October 2015 (UTC)- Support Perfect colors, good composition, nice background. A 2006 shot made with 8 MPx compact/bridge camera which could put ashame many of animal shots we see today here (and made with stellar FFs etc etc). I asked Atsme to confirm this: its made with underwater housing, and foto is upscaled, not downscaled as many people do here. When I wanted to see other shots in category, I saw its only one - so exclusive shot. To get underwater shots like this is more rare than usual. This is not a bird on a tree on daylight but shot under strobes (diving photo storbes are some kind of state of art stuff), visibility down there is different topic than we are used to, its not air, and currents are moving divers pretty much. --Mile (talk) 17:32, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
- Support No QI but good composition and colours LivioAndronico (talk) 18:31, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose I fail to understand the merit of upscaling a digital photo. Anyway, my main problem is that many areas, even within the subjects, drop to complete blackness. The dynamic range of the scene is clearly not captured adequately. — Julian H.✈ 13:37, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Julian; there's a lot of noise in this one. Daniel Case (talk) 15:36, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
- Comment I noticed that WP has few underwater FP candidates, and I hope it's not because we're throwing the baby out with the bath water. Critiques of underwater photography should not be on the same scale as land shots or photographs taken in controlled environments, or under optimum conditions. They certainly shouldn't be dismissed for lacking certain attributes one cannot possibly achieve under such an extreme environment. If you've never experienced underwater photography, please try to imagine the conditions. It's difficult enough to capture an elusive critter on land, but to capture one that's hiding inside a dark crevice on a reef structure at depths of 30 to 40 ft is far more difficult. In addition to dealing with currents, you're dealing with constant motion while trying to maintain neutral buoyancy, all the while trying to keep your subject in focus. It makes underwater photography a rather daunting task and highly dependent on post-processing. You have no tripod, varying visibility, limited natural lighting depending on depth, light refraction, and you cannot touch the coral or attempt to stabilize yourself on the ocean floor because it creates backscatter. Macro photography brings even greater challenges when both the photog and subject are constantly moving; depth of field, freezing action, dynamic ranging and proper lighting without back scatter is something everyone should attempt at least once. 😆 Add to that, the fact that you're working with a fixed amount of air in a bulky cylinder on your back, fins for feet, limited vision through a mask while trying to keep an eye on your subject and steady yourself in the current without landing on a scorpion fish or fire coral. It's a far cry different from shooting on land. There's also a risk factor in getting close enough to a live subject, which shouldn't be more than 2 to 3 ft away, or only inches if you're shooting macro. Underwater critters will either be frightened away by your exhaust bubbles, or become defensive and attack you. I just hope that while editors are judging underwater images they will at least consider the level of difficulty and place a bit more emphasis on composition and lighting, especially underwater macro shots. With regards to the merits of upscaling, I agree that it lacks merit on most levels, except when the image is unique enough to warrant a bit of quality loss for enlargement purposes, especially when a purchaser wants to use that image for the company's trade show display. Happy editing! Atsme😊Consult 16:46, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
