Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Cirsium vulgare. Uitgebloeide Speerdistel Cirsium vulgare in verval.jpg

File:Cirsium vulgare. Uitgebloeide Speerdistel Cirsium vulgare in verval.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2017 at 07:18:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Cirsium vulgare. Uitgebloeide Speerdistel Cirsium vulgare in verval.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Cirsium vulgare. Uitgebloeide Speerdistel Cirsium vulgare in verval.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants Cirsium vulgare #Family Asteraceae.
•  Info Cirsium vulgare. Seed Boxes of Cirsium vulgare in decay. All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 07:18, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 07:18, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 09:26, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:06, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:11, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Support HalfGig talk 01:11, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 15:51, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose The light is very uniform and the plant just blends into the background - no wow for me -- Thennicke (talk) 00:36, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose The plant is sharp but it's like Thennike says, sorry, the image seems a bit flat. However I could imagine that the background could be improved. --Basotxerri (talk) 16:14, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

•  Neutral As I'm implicated in the image preparation, I prefer to be neutral because I'd like to hear others if it's good enough now. In any case I hope you like it better! --Basotxerri (talk) 13:39, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

•  Oppose - I agree with the other opposers: There isn't sufficient contrast between the plant and the background for it to stand out sufficiently, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:15, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose per opposition --Mile (talk) 09:38, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
• Note: Background was enhanced by Basotxerri. Thank you very much for this!--Famberhorst (talk) 13:07, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

@Thennicke, Thennicke, Ikan Kekek, Ikan Kekek, PetarM, and Mile: Background was enhanced by Basotxerri

•  Comment Its still problem, lower half isnt in focus. Just needs stacking or parallel shot. --Mile (talk) 13:39, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment - It looks to me like the entire photo was darkened. I'm not sure I can support that. However, I've struck my oppose vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:07, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

• A bit brighter now. But there's more than only darkening: more contrast and saturation, too. Maybe it's not good enough, though. --Basotxerri (talk) 20:23, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

• Sorry, but this is a problem with the scene itself - the plant is nearly the same colour as the background, so it still doesn't wow me. Compare to this for example, where there is more of a distinction between the colours and between the textures (the background is more blurred) -- Thennicke (talk) 03:36, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose Nothing special, no reason for FP. --Karelj (talk) 19:48, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--Mile (talk) 14:02, 27 October 2017 (UTC)