Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Pyrus pyrifolia fruit on tree 1-PS LR.jpg

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

File:Pyrus pyrifolia fruit on tree 1-PS LR.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2017 at 23:21:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pyrus pyrifolia, Asian Pear, Raja cultivar, fruit on tree.

* Support. Beautifully balanced and articulate in terms of colour shapes space. Excellent image.(Littleolive oil (talk) 03:45, 22 August 2017 (UTC))[reply]

  •  Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:39, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose The motive is not striking and the visible masking errors are not acceptable.--Ermell (talk) 07:10, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Per Ermell. Please see notes. And I'm not sure about the focus.--Jebulon (talk) 08:36, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Comment The human eye does not see everything in focus. What is on the periphery of vision is always slightly out of focus. This is why this image works so well. The slight out of focus edges allow the eye to focus on the fruit - the subject of the image - without the eye bouncing back and forth on an image as it would when the entire image has the same focus. There is a sense that this image mimics the way the eye actually sees. Representational painters are often very aware of this fact and paint accordingly. The image is masterful in my opinion in part because of the slightly out of focus edges. Note the work of photographers like Imogen Cunningham and Julia Margaret Cameron who used soft focus techniques on images. Both sharp focus and soft focus are legitimate ways of dealing with a subject (Littleolive oil (talk) 17:26, 22 August 2017 (UTC))[reply]
    •  Comment Jebulon, I don't see what you think is strange in the image note. That's a small young leaf coming in from the left and dead dying leaf in the background. PumpkinSky talk 10:54, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support. Lovely work. Andy Mabbett (talk) 18:06, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Per Ermell. --Karelj (talk) 21:45, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Great composition, the stem and leaves create a depth to the image and the light is just right. I will support it as soon as all the errors made when stacking the images are fixed. As you have seen by now, the merging programs can be very unreliable and you have to fix the blooper yourself. In a focus stacked pic, all parts in one focus plane must be equally sharp. --cart-Talk 08:56, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Comment I will look at this again this evening. Honestly, I'm not sure I can fix it to FP level, but maybe. @Ermell: , and info for User:W.carter, I done understand what is wrong regarding the comment "clone stamp mistake". Can you elaborate? Also in the one where say the leaf goes sharp/unsharp, I'm not sure a source image is consistently sharp. Is it okay if, in order to make it consistent, it's more blurry than it is now? And I assume you're talking about the dead leaf here? PumpkinSky talk 09:33, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do what you can to make the photo as ok as possible. There are a few more places (besides the notations) with faults. I think you may have tried to 'run before you can walk here', since this is one of your first focus stackings. You chose a tricky subject and a lot (16!) photos, probably thinking that the software would fix it all. It might have been better here to do this in about 8 photos, leaving some of the background unsharp and less room for the program to <bleep!> up. --cart-Talk 09:45, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • That thought has occurred to me. If I can't fix it tonight. Maybe I'll restack with only 8 photos (the 8 best that I have). Yes, there are lots of objects and shapes in this. The trickiest parts have been the leaves.PumpkinSky talk 10:22, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 07:45, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]