Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sihlwald ramson 20200427 2.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Sihlwald ramson 20200427 2.jpg[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Apr 2021 at 08:29:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Switzerland#Zürich
Info created & uploaded by Domob - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 08:29, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 08:29, 5 April 2021 (UTC)- Support Thanks for nominating this picture, I've been thinking about it myself for some time now. --Domob (talk) 08:30, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- Support Painterly. Cmao20 (talk) 14:48, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Neutral Nice but sub-optimum aperture : F/5.6 really limits the depth of field, and I would have preferred a background in focus like the foreground -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:51, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Comment f/5.6 on MFT equals to f/11 on full frame and delivers the best sharpness on this system. As I believe that this is a hand-held shot, f/5.6 + 1/25 s + ISO 400 is IMO the wisest choice for this shot. --Basotxerri (talk) 17:17, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
- Example of a shot taken at F/13 @24mm, so really not far from this picture. And all is in focus: foreground AND background. But I took care to focus at a good distance, while I suspect it was not the case here: it seems that the focus is too close (for my taste) -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:08, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Comment Thanks for the feedback! My intention here was (if I remember correctly) to focus on the foreground and not necessarily have everything as sharp as possible; but I agree that might have been the better choice. Note that the camera is M4/3 (with a crop factor of 2), so f/5.6 is not as wide as it would be on full frame; but I could have chosen f/8 instead. --Domob (talk) 04:21, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, I agree with you and Basotxerri above concerning this factor, but I'm also surprised by the level of blurriness behind, at F/11, thus I assume the point of focus could have been better, if chosen further, at an intermediate distance between the foreground and the background. Just my subjective feeling -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:42, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Weak oppose Maybe I'm just not seeing it, but I don't see what makes this pic exceptional or of significantly more encyclopedic value than other photographs of the area/plant. I would also prefer more DoF. Buidhe (talk) 06:47, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Oppose per Buidhe. I could see the potential for an FP in the woods beyond the stump, at a different time of day. Daniel Case (talk) 01:42, 7 April 2021 (UTC)- Oppose per others, the WB also seems to be too much on the yellow side --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:48, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose per above --RolfHill (talk) 18:18, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose per others. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:51, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 10:11, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
