Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Exploding E match collage.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Exploding E match collage.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Feb 2017 at 22:36:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
Info All by me. Please read my replys below to learn what E matches are used for and why the image looks the way it does. – LucasT 22:36, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
Support – LucasT 22:36, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry, but I would preferably like to see much more of the "fireworks". At least all of the central white-hot core and above it the same length of the sparks as on the sides. Even if the E-matches are the subject, the flame is what makes the photo go wow. Do not be stingy with the "wow". ;) It would also be nice to have some link or explanation about these E-matches in the description, such as what it is that burns/sparks when (as I suspect) a current is making a filament in the bulb hot to ignite the chems. --cart-Talk 23:01, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
- @W.carter: 1. My thought process with this was to provide as much detail on the E matches on the bottom while also showing the ignition on the top so I arrived at this exact framing and I didn't capture any more of the flame at the top. In my opinion, there is enough flame included for effect and the flame is not the main subject so I feel the crop is not harming. Please also consider that I can't show more of it in a reshoot without increasing my focus distance and thus lowering the resolution of the rest in the process (to maintain the same scale of all objects) or alternatively change this composition which I like. You can see that the flame/sparks of these E matches are quite far reaching by looking at the linked other version on the file page. So I would always have to crop the flame somewhere, depending on which direction it goes. 2. There is sadly no english wiki page about them, only a german one, in which the image is already used. I'm no expert on them so I'm hesitant to describe the processes in detail, but I added a bit more info. – LucasT 23:15, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support I'm wowed, good composition --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:02, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Cart. Maybe it would be more impressive if I could see it in use, lighting a cigarette or a candle. But mostly this image makes me think why bother with these things when regular matches or Bic lighters are everywhere... lNeverCry 09:20, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
- @INeverCry: I think you are misunderstanding what these things are for. E matches are not intended/practical/safe to light up a cigarette or candle, they are used to ignite fireworks and thus are usually deeply buried into whatever they are igniting. They are an integral part of professional fireworks all over the world, firing thousands of charges in the matter of minutes, all computer controlled. The E match is where information technology and electricity ends and chemistry begins. Showing them igniting anything else would be wrong and plain misleading, just to make the image more interesting to some. It would be almost impossible to photograph them inside a pyrotechnics charge while they are firing, or very dangerous at least so I would never try to do that just for a FP. – LucasT 09:34, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
- In that case, perhaps a vertical composition showing more of the ignition and sparking would work better. lNeverCry 20:10, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
- @INeverCry: I think you are misunderstanding what these things are for. E matches are not intended/practical/safe to light up a cigarette or candle, they are used to ignite fireworks and thus are usually deeply buried into whatever they are igniting. They are an integral part of professional fireworks all over the world, firing thousands of charges in the matter of minutes, all computer controlled. The E match is where information technology and electricity ends and chemistry begins. Showing them igniting anything else would be wrong and plain misleading, just to make the image more interesting to some. It would be almost impossible to photograph them inside a pyrotechnics charge while they are firing, or very dangerous at least so I would never try to do that just for a FP. – LucasT 09:34, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support per Martin. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:33, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose Per cart --LivioAndronico (talk) 10:17, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support Per Martin WClarke (talk) 18:44, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose Lucas, I understand your point about having to show them this way but ... for that very reason I think this is condemned to be a VI, maybe a QI, at best. First, I don't like the crop; second, I think showing the match both pre and post in the same shot is sort of misleading ... I know it is done for educational reasons, but this is not obvious to the viewer. Daniel Case (talk) 20:58, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support --Karelj (talk) 20:17, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /lNeverCry 06:31, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
