Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Flamenco en el Palacio Andaluz, Sevilla, España, 2015-12-06, DD 08.JPG

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

File:Flamenco en el Palacio Andaluz, Sevilla, España, 2015-12-06, DD 08.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Mar 2017 at 19:10:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Flamenco performance in Palacio Andaluz, Seville, Spain.
  • I feel a little bad about this, but I find the counterexample and arguments of the opposing voters persuasive, and I'm also finding that rolled-up thing in the background distracting, so I'm changing my vote to  Neutral. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:39, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You are welcome, btw, nice expression! --The Photographer 20:09, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's also the reason why I enjoy it, you can almost feel that passion and pride Poco2 20:11, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose The guy "hugging" her from behind is unfortunate, as is the silver microphone stand sticking into her right arm, and the green tint on her clothes is not great as well. Her dark green dress is preventing the separation from the cluttered background, which also has some shadows that further distract from the main subject. The overal image looks underexposed (could be a fair representation of the venue, of course, but still I would have brightened it up to reveal more detail in the dress, and it just feels like it should be brighter because of stage lights). As leg action is important in Flamenco, it would have been better to include more at the bottom. As it is, it is a very centered and IMO too high framing. I struggle to regard this as one of the best pictures we have, sorry. – LucasT 21:18, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Her face looks much too red. White balance, color saturation, or something else? Yann (talk) 22:10, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose I remember this series well from QIC and even then I didn't think they were that great. He expression and pose is very much flamenco, but the light is not the best, the background is very busy and the crop is too high. Flamenco is just as much about the legs and feet of the dancer, so it would have been great if there had been less space above her head and more of her legs showing. Sorry. --cart-Talk 22:28, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose per Yann's comment and other opposes. Daniel Case (talk) 03:47, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose per others I'm afraid. -- Colin (talk) 08:38, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Will have a look into it tonight and see how I can improve it Poco2 11:56, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    I've uploaded a ✓ new version, Yann, do colors look now better to you?
Lucas: the new version is a bit brighter, but I don't think that it depicts the scene necessarily in a more realistic way the way I observe it. Regarding background and colors I can only say that it was an stage, with limelights and a lot of other musicians and generally it was quite dark and I tried to take pictures when the lights were powered on, otherwise it would be very noisy. Do you find this other shot better?
cart, to me flamenco is a very passionate dance and I enjoy the face expression of the dancer. It is of course a lot of work with legs and hands, too, but that was not the purpose of this shot. What do you think about this one? Poco2 19:37, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The colors look better now. All the different shots from this performance have elements that taken together would be great, but I don't think that one of the lone photos is quite there. For me a really good flamenco pic would be something like this. That photo has the intense concentrated expression, the pose, movement and it is full-figure with a less messy background. Sorry. --cart-Talk 19:53, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I fully agree with cart. While the other photos might be better, I think they still would have a hard time becoming FP because of the background, at least for me. – LucasT 19:59, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /lNeverCry 21:32, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]