Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Geneva mechanism 6spoke animation.gif

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

File:Geneva mechanism 6spoke animation.gif, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2009 at 10:34:23
This animation shows a six-position Geneva Mechanism in operation

  •  Info created by Mike1024 - uploaded by Luigi Chiesa - nominated by JovanCormac (talk) 10:34, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Info Reason for nomination: Extremely clear animation illustrating a difficult-to-explain mechanism. Already featured on two Wikipedias. We really need more featured diagrams and animations. -- JovanCormac (talk) 10:34, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support As nominator. -- JovanCormac (talk) 10:34, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Very smooth and clear animation, I think it deserves the FP status. Looking forward to seeing a bigger file if it exists, otherwise it doesn't matter. →Diti the penguin — 10:45, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Simple, smooth, concise and very informative. And a very interesting mechanism. Thank you for nominating something different! Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 11:02, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support A bit small but very well presented. /Daniel78 (talk) 13:55, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support   ■ MMXXtalk  15:04, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Very well done. --Calibas (talk) 15:10, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support ---donald- (talk) 19:34, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- MJJR (talk) 21:04, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support As JovanCormac and others. The Museum of Science and Industry in Birmingham used to have a display of this and many other such mechanisms dating mostly from the 19th century (some earlier), which were very informative on the ingenuity of our industrial ancestors before electronics took much of the skill out of machinery. Sadly, this is one of the things lost to the people of (and visitors to) Birmingham when the then Labour administration closed this free museum and transferred many exhibits to the Think Tank to the loss of the people of Birmingham. -- Robert of Ramsor (talk) 01:01, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose I think it is an intriguing illustration of this mechanical device, but the illustration with its plain coloration simply has not the delicate and professional look and feel and technical quality I would expect from an FP, which could appear on the main page. A 3D rendered version, which shades, texture etc please, see, e.g., File:Simple CV Joint animated.gif for an example of more worked through graphics. --Slaunger (talk) 12:00, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • IMO it is the fact that this is not a 3D animation that makes it so very clear to see what is going on. 3D often distracts with textures and unnecessary shading and lighting. As long as the structure in question isn't 3D itself (such as the CV Joint), 2D illustrations can be much more clear and legible. -- JovanCormac (talk) 14:49, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • I agree with you that this is an important difference between the planar geometry nominated here and the example I gave. To clarify what I meant, I do not mind the current quite simple isometric representation and its current angle of view (which is also three-dimensional as the sheet objects used has to have finite thickness). What I would like to see is a more delicate coloration of the surfaces including light sources, shading and more realistic colors (metallic). That would IMO not distract from understanding the mechanism. In a more sophisticated animation the mechanism could be shown in a real mechanical watch application, where the watch parts interfacing to the mechanism could be shown half-transparent and let the mechanism stand out. Having the mechanism shown in a specific application could give an even better understanding of the purpose of the mechanism. I am not saying that this illustration is in any way bad, I just feel there are so many ways such an illustration could be made even more informative and interesting to look at as an observer. --Slaunger (talk) 20:31, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • (Don't forget that JovanCormac is not the creator of this image, only the Nominator, so he is in the same boat as the rest of us in discussing some of the details.) I agree that the simple illustration we have here is lacking some of those "work of art" aspects which would make it "Picture of the Day". The shading Slaunger asks for would be nice. If someone uploads such a version, make sure that Jovan is told so that he can nominate that one as a replacement for this. Meanwhile, this is (IMO with an Engineering BSc) an acceptable illustration of how this mechanism works. William of Occam rules OK. -- Robert of Ramsor (talk) 20:49, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support I like the combination of this clean, simple drawing and such smooth animation. --Lošmi (talk) 02:32, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support - Outstanding animation. - ☩Damërung ☩. -- 21:35, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question - The lunar-shaped section (in green), what is it for? - ☩Damërung ☩. -- 21:47, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • While I'm not a mechanics expert, it looks to me as if the round side holds the red wheel in place while the half-moon side is cut out so that the red wheel may slide through. The green shape really seems to be the shape generated by the movement of the whole mechanism, and therefore quite optimal. -- JovanCormac (talk) 05:57, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply] 
result: 11 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Maedin\talk 07:33, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Geneva_mechanism_6spoke_animation.gif&oldid=25410911"