Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Chondrocidaris brevispina.jpg

File:Chondrocidaris brevispina.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2020 at 04:03:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Chondrocidaris brevispina.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Chondrocidaris brevispina.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals#Class_:_Echinoidea
•  Info created by FredD - uploaded by FredD - nominated by FredD -- FredD (talk) 04:00, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
•  Support -- FredD (talk) 04:00, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
•  Oppose Blown highlights, artificial background, and the white balance seems too warm -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:53, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Basile, also the framing is not perfect, with the sea urchin far closer to the top of the frame than the bottom. I don't think this is too far off FP though, the depth of field could be better but it's still OK, and the subject is very interesting. Perhaps a better (less unbalanced) crop with the highlights pulled back and the white balance fixed might be close to FP. Cmao20 (talk) 15:44, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
•  CommentCmao20 & Basile Morin, I'm not a pro in picture editing, so don't hesitate to propose edited versions. The picture does need some re-framing indeed (I pivoted it a little, that's why now it seems too far). The background is lab black background, not "artificial" (no deep-etch). FredD (talk) 21:34, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

• A background that is color #000000 everywhere means it's artificial. -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:49, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

...Or that it used a lab picture device (glass + black velvet) with overexposition of the subject, such as in any professional lab picture (see also here, pictures from the same collection using the same device). FredD (talk) 03:28, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

The picture linked above seems correctly lit, whereas this one suffers from a harsh lighting source, creating reflections. A soft light would have produced better results. As it seems to have been photographed in interior, the use of a tripod could also have offered a wider depth of field, for more details of the spines -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:32, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

•  Oppose, per others. Daniel Case (talk) 14:26, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:05, 21 April 2020 (UTC)