Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Kids in Rishikesh, India.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Kids in Rishikesh, India.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Dec 2010 at 21:04:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Info Another excellent shot by the winner of our last POTY contest. Created & uploaded by Paulrudd, nominated by Alvesgaspar (talk)
- Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:04, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
- Support --Miguel Bugallo 22:05, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
- Support--Mbz1 (talk) 00:45, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- Support Definitively. --Murdockcrc (talk) 11:56, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- Support Yann (talk) 15:58, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- Love it. --IdLoveOne (talk) 21:47, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose I don't understand what is featurable here. Technically, there is a strong overexposure behind-between the heads which I find disturbing.--Jebulon (talk) 10:07, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- I think that's only noticeable in the preview thumbnail. --IdLoveOne (talk) 18:35, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose Alas, Jebulon was perfectly right. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:23, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose pitty for the distracting background. --Elekhh (talk) 23:41, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose Overexposure above the head of the right and smaller child.--Snaevar (talk) 01:54, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
- Support Overexposure schmowerexposure. Didn't notice before it's mentioned. --Lošmi (talk) 22:37, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
- Question What does mean "schmowerexposure", please ?--Jebulon (talk) 09:38, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
- 'S'called mocking. :) --IdLoveOne (talk) 04:40, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
- Question What does mean "schmowerexposure", please ?--Jebulon (talk) 09:38, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
- Neutral Good, but would prefer a little less distraction...perhaps crop the left ~1/4 of the picture and the right side to halfway between the picture's edge and the subjects? If my visual calculations are correct, this would result in the picture still being of good composition, but less distracting. --Ks1stm (talk) [alternative account of Ks0stm] 00:21, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose --Martin Kozák (talk) 15:52, 24 December 2010 (UTC) – Background is very problematic here according to me. At least because of very long depth of field. And what is featured on this photo by its overall value?
- Comment -- Very long depth of field. Are you sure what you are talking about? -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:34, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose Overexposure in background near heads, per Jebulon. The gaze of the larger child detracts from the composition for me too. --Avenue (talk) 17:04, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 09:12, 29 December 2010 (UTC)