Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Procession during Easter Friday in Santa Ana Guanajuato.jpg

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

File:Procession during Easter Friday in Santa Ana Guanajuato.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Feb 2017 at 18:55:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
It's not technical perfection, all the images should be valued coldly without taking circumstantial factors. Using a good camera and lens is important, for example. You can not take a photo with a compact camera and say it is the best quality the camera can do. Sadly, everyone here is judged equally. And I say sadly because there are countries where FP will never come because it is impossible for their citizens to buy a DSLR or a good compact camera. In your case, you use a DSLR, however, with a technique that is possible to improve, in my humble opinion (My vote is not {{o}} how you can see). --The Photographer 12:01, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, ok, it was a mistake --The Photographer 18:43, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
discussion about B&W and noise
  •  Comment Well, I guess 2015 can be considered contemporary... But I strongly disagree that noise is too high for FP. First of all, nowhere in the book says that noise cannot be present in an image, or that it is a requirement for FP. Noise is the result of several factors, one of them being high ISO. High ISO is the result of light conditions, and you either take the image with correct exposure in natural light, which in this case lent itself to the overall aspect, or you take it with flash and eliminate the dramatic contrast, or you don´t take the picture at all. As I said above, photography is a language, and as such, it has wide latitude as a form of expression. In this case, noise is a result of light conditions that necessitated the use of high ISO. I have always, and always will disagree with the pixel counters in this forum that put superficial form over depth. Imagine if Robert Capa #REDIRECT[[1]] were to upload his famous image #REDIRECT[[2]] to this forum, or if someone did it for him; under common practices here the image would never make it! Grainy, soft, cut off, not large enough, out of focus, etc., etc. Human events are phenomenological in nature, they flow like a river, never repeat themselves, and good photography, even if it lacks technical perfection, captures the essence of the phenomena regardless of technical perfection. What is a beautiful flower without aroma? --Tomascastelazo (talk) 18:04, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question - Your point is well taken, and technical perfection is certainly not needed, but what would the drawback of just a bit of noise reduction be? Would it adversely affect the picture in some way? Please explain because I'm not so knowledgeable about such things. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:17, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • One thing that would happen if you applied NR on this level of graininess, is that you would loose all detail in the veils, hair and eyes on the women in the photo. You would also loose the documentary feel and the photo would look strange with all that smoothness. --cart-Talk 19:29, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agreed that the grain is necessary for the documentary-feeling to it, along with making it more somber and serious. This same effect seems to be done more commonly in photojournalism, as can be seen in the winners of the World Press Photo of the Year in both 2016 and 2009. The photograph that won in 2016 had an ISO of 6400, which brought significant grain, though turned out with great results. It seems that in digital photography grain and noise are often automatically looked down upon, and any potential artistic effect is overlooked. There is a difference between careless noise in a photograph, and noise in a photograph to achieve a dramatic effect. And IMO the latter is the case here. Thanks. WClarke 20:23, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also see these two photos also from World Press Photo that are both recent and use a similar effect: 2016 and 2017. Thanks. WClarke 20:35, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 10:38, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Procession_during_Easter_Friday_in_Santa_Ana_Guanajuato.jpg&oldid=296808481"