Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sidef 024.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Sidef 024.jpg[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2010 at 17:55:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created by - uploaded by - nominated by Özgür Mülazımoğlu -- Mulazimoglu (talk) 17:55, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Support -- Mulazimoglu (talk) 17:55, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Nice image, good composition of a good subject. But the 
chromatic aberration are really too strong IMO.--Jebulon (talk) 18:20, 10 December 2010 (UTC)- Oppose Very bad composition, blown out sky, not sharp. Should be FPXed.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:29, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 |
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: luminance and chromatic noise are too intense. deficient sharpness, poi, composition, crop, levels, colours. chromatic abberation. sky with blown out whites and lacking image information (blue skies would be more considerate). | Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed. |
- regards, PETER WEIS TALK 20:38, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment -- Jebulon says good composition; Mbz1 says Very bad composition. Pls anyone honestly tell me what is a composition? :) ... Mulazimoglu (talk) 08:49, 11 December 2010 (UTC)- Info as easy as this might sound: check out the article on composition. please consider that neither jebulon, mbz1, nor me return a final verdict - composition is very much a question of taste. your composition could be improved by changing the point of view (by reshooting the whole construction and using a different angle), applying rule of thirds, placing landscape in the bokeh or other technical modifications. if you have a closer look on old paintings you might get some inspiration for choosing a "good" composition. regards, PETER WEIS TALK 10:47, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah i know this picture of mine can not be a featured one. That day it was too cloudy. But maybe Very bad composition (visual arts) may be written by someone. I have just learned what is a composition but i still do not know what is a very bad composition. Also i wonder if we have a such term like disgusting composition. Thanks. Mulazimoglu (talk) 16:21, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
- Comment Composition is a subjective criteria. I have examined the work of major artists and find, for example, the "rule of thirds" violated routinely. I would say that it is generally unhelpful to use emphasis in reviews, especially in critical reviews. If you can, please identify the element(s) that contribute to your evaluation of the composition. For example, you might suggest that part of the subject is cut off by an edge of the picture, the subject is too centered, etc. These sort of comments may be more helpful to the photographer than "bad composition". However, I find that those criteria are often ignored by major artists, also. Walter Siegmund (talk) 17:47, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
- Comment I said "good composition", because the picture was not taken randomly. There is a study of perspective, a choice of symmetry, an appropriate "framing" of the chosen subject. But I agree with others, it is a very subjective criteria. Some like symmetry, some others dislike it absolutely, for example. I think symmetry is better for "Commons", as an encyclopedic work, but it is personal. Nevertheless, in my opinion, the "rule of thirds" is not very relevant. Matter of taste... Mulazimoglu, don't give up.--Jebulon (talk) 18:54, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for the comments. As you know i am new here and trying to be helpful for this featured pictures project. And in my comments i try to be honest and trying to be friendly. But as a newcomer it really hurts when someone tells your work very bad after some other says good. Bye the way my English is improving huh? :) Mulazimoglu (talk) 19:17, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
- I think "very bad" cannot refer here simply to the composition, Mbz1 might have meant that choosing this angle under the given light condition wasn't a good idea. I wouldn't have placed "composition" in the FPX box. Otherwise as good introduction to composition I recommend Arnheim, Rudolf: Art and Visual Perception. A Psychology of the Creative Eye. (1974), a classic translated into 14 languages. --Elekhh (talk) 19:44, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
- PS. I disagree with the above statement that "composition is a subjective criteria". It might have a subjective component, but it certainly has an objective component as well, which makes people from around the world recognise the same piece of art as something pleasant. In part this has to do with our common anatomy, in part with universal elements of human culture. --Elekhh (talk) 19:51, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
- I disagree with the above statement, but is has to be a very long and interesting debate (is "Art" universal etc etc ?), and I don't have the good english words for that, sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 00:32, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
- Comment thanks for the input elekhh. perhaps one fine day this way of thinking will lead to a change of the guidelines. in contrast to jebulon i think that the rule of thirds is very relevant if talking about compositions. amongst different methods to compose an image, this is globally acknowledged, part of our guidelines and features many pieces of art and photography. for a beginner it might be a good opener on compositions (easy to check if using gimp or photoshop). @Mulazimoglu please consider that the attempt should always be to critique a user's work not the user. assuming good faith any kind of reaction is regarding your work. be aware that hardly any user knows you in person and therefore can only react to the content you provide (media files, texts, etc.) regards, PETER WEIS TALK 20:21, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
- Comment for a beginner it might be a good opener on compositions: agree with that. I have a problem with the english word "guidelines". In french, a guideline (guide-lignes) is only a suggestion (maybe strong), an help, a way, but not a law or a mandatory. Then, in some cases, violating the guidelines has not to be the only reason to oppose. Furthermore, I notice that in the guidelines, one can read the word "should" ("devrait", conditionnal), and sometimes the words "has to" or "must"("doit", indicative). I believe it makes a difference, but perhaps I am too cartesian... --Jebulon (talk) 00:48, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
- So we have a lot to discuss. Mulazimoglu (talk) 08:30, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
