Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Neillia affinis, trosspirea. 23-05-2022 (actm.).jpg

File:Neillia affinis, trosspirea. 23-05-2022 (actm.).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2022 at 15:29:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Neillia affinis, trosspirea. 23-05-2022 (actm.).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Neillia affinis, trosspirea. 23-05-2022 (actm.).jpg

3357

780

150

230

4995

2810

small stacking error

1459

1820

619

550

4995

2810

stacking error on blurred flower

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Rosaceae
•  Info Flowers of a Neillia affinis. Focus stack of 36 photos.
  All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:29, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
•  Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:29, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
•  Comment I've marked a few stacking errors. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:48, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
•  Question In light of these stacking errors is there any way to fix them? Urban Versis 32^KB ⚡ ^{(talk | contribs)} 18:59, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

•  Done. Correction. Thanks for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:28, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

•  Info I like the red of the flowers and the blur of the back leaf, wonderful work that doesn't need to be re-stacked. All it takes is a detailed retouching to make the photo perfect. I have added a few more notations on the nomination page, or rather supplemented. -- Radomianin (talk) 08:41, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

•  Done. Correction and sophistication. Thanks for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:53, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

•  Support Thank you very much for your new editing which made the picture perfect. In addition, the gentle darkening of the background creates a brighter, even more pleasing red of the sepals. -- Radomianin (talk) 16:25, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
•  Support Very beautiful and impressive. (Maybe there are still some minor traces of halos in the background, but the flower itself is very good now.) --Aristeas (talk) 16:32, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
•  Oppose I don't think this can be rescued. Will reconsider if new stack uploaded. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:59, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
•  New version uploaded The traces of halos on the left side I have removed as well as possible and uploaded the photo in agreement with the photographer. Best wishes, -- Radomianin (talk) 06:25, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

• Thank you very much, Radomianin! Now all traces of halos which I have mentioned above have been fixed. --Aristeas (talk) 09:19, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

• Thank you for uploading an improved version of my photo!--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:06, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

•  Comment improved, but one error is still bothering me (note name: stacking/cloning error). Part of the petal is cloned out, but should be visible. --Ivar (talk) 11:58, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

•  Done Thank you very much for your note, Ivar. I have carefully reinserted the blurred petal detail from the first file version at the xy coordinates (3400,870). Best wishes, -- Radomianin (talk) 15:00, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

•  Support All that work was worth it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:57, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
•  Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:52, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
•  Neutral I really enjoy your work, Agnes! But I can't support until the stacking errors are fixed. Please see my image note in the right center of the picture. -- Wolf im Wald 00:06, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

•  Done Thank you very much for pointing out this stacking error, Wolf im Wald. I have removed this halo at the xy coordinates (3000,1400) as well as I could. Best wishes, -- Radomianin (talk) 06:05, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

•  Weak support some small issues remain, but overall is imo good enough now. --Ivar (talk) 06:17, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
•  Support I think, the current version is okay enough. -- Alex Florstein (talk) 06:44, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
•  Support --GRDN711 (talk) 14:05, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
•  Info Dear reviewers @Agnes Monkelbaan, Charlesjsharp, Urban Versis 32, Aristeas, Ikan Kekek, Iifar, Daniel Case, Der Wolf im Wald, Florstein, and GRDN711: The remaining halo issues, mentioned by Ivar, didn't leave me in peace after my workday was over, so I retouched the file again – for the last time. In at least 15 positions I have carefully removed small and larger halo fragments. I'm sorry for the conscientious pinging. I could have done all the retouching work at once but I just didn't have enough time before. Best wishes :) -- Radomianin (talk) 15:20, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

•  Comment Not sure what you've done but the background is really blotchy; definitely still an oppose from me. Compare this with George's Alcea Rosea nomination and the quality difference is massive. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:36, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

• Thanks a lot for your comment. If you compare the first version directly with the last version, you can see the differences. The extensive retouching was mostly limited to the halos (stacking errors) around the petals. The artificial background I did not edit. Best wishes, -- Radomianin (talk) 21:10, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

•  Weak support The green leaf in the background is a bit unpleasant to me, but overall worthy of FP status. -- IamMM (talk) 16:28, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
•  Support -- Wolf im Wald 22:51, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
•  Support Cmao20 (talk) 01:49, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
•  Support--Ermell (talk) 06:09, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
•  Weak support per IamMM -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:31, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 13:43, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
•  Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:29, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 01:36, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family : Rosaceae