Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Solar eclipse on April 8, 2024 in Québec city, pano.jpg

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

File:Solar eclipse on April 8, 2024 in Québec city, pano.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2024 at 11:04:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Solar eclipse on April 8, 2024 in Québec city
Regarding the discussion below: even though the nomination has been withdrawn, I would like to strike my support because of the circumstantial evidence. -- Radomianin (talk) 07:52, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --SHB2000 (talk) 22:53, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Could you explain a bit how these images were created? – Aristeas (talk) 08:50, 21 April 2024 (UTC) Sorry, striked out – see the discussion below. – Aristeas (talk) 18:52, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I remember that day was very windy. I had been waiting for the eclipse for several days, continuously checking the time. With 20 minutes to go before the eclipse started, I saw people gathering to watch it from my building; some even lacked proper protection. From my vantage point, I spotted a space near these people that was large enough for my tripod. I had a special graduated filter for the eclipse, but when I tried to fit it on my camera, it didn't fit, so I had to use tape to secure the filter to the lens. I used a 100-400mm Z nikon lens with a 2X extender, effectively giving me 800mm on a full-frame format, which made the setup extremely heavy. Despite the limited time, I grabbed my camera and went down to set up on a small mound. The wind was ridiculously strong, so I opted to place metal stakes in each tripod leg to keep it from flying away and added a counterweight to the center to minimize vibration, recalling that Quebec City is often windy due to its proximity to the Saint Lawrence River. After setting up the camera and tripod, I had to keep adjusting it directly towards the sun to account for the movements of the Earth, the Moon, and the Sun. I couldn’t just leave the camera pointed and shoot; I had to periodically recenter the Moon and the Sun in my shots. The photos were taken with a manual setting to minimize exposure during the partial eclipse, capturing significant phases at regular intervals. Later, I developed the images in Lightroom, applying only lens correction and chromatic aberration adjustments, which I didn't really notice. Finally, I merged the images into a single composition using Photoshop. Wilfredor (talk) 12:39, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you very much! – Aristeas (talk) 16:29, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Lovely work. Wolverine XI 11:12, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Interesting but I have some questions here. Are the shots in the upper row really independent from the lower row? because I wouldn't expect the same sun stains top left and bottom right. The alignment is not good either, the distance between the frames looks arbitrary, the distance e.g. between the fourth and fifht (top row) is bigger than the others (same between second and third in the lower row). It would have also been great to capture the whole process, Poco a poco (talk) 14:50, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Poco is right. There is something fishy going on here. If you reduce the intensity (only!) of the image, it looks to me like the top row is the same as the bottom row, only reversed. I opened this in Photoshop and just toggled the levels (ctrl+L) to darker. How is this Wilfredor? 'Pinging' previous voters about this, Yann, ★, The Cosmonaut, Radomianin, SHB2000, Aristeas, Wolverine XI. In this version I have toggled the levels (ctrl+L) to an extreme. In that version there are some very small differences between the two rows; perhaps only half of the eclipse was actually photographed and that series used for both rows. Downloading and checking a photo at higher/lower/extreme 'levels' is always a good way to see what might have been done with it. --Cart (talk) 18:07, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The bottom row is created to generate geometry from the same shots that are above. Wilfredor (talk) 19:34, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Alt version[edit]

  •  Info In this version, I have implemented Poco a poco's suggestion to maintain an identical space between each lunar phase, and I have also removed the bottom row that could create a mistaken perception that these are subsequent phases, when in reality it is a reflection of the top row to maintain symmetry. As previously mentioned, "only half of the eclipse was actually photographed"; indeed, there was no total eclipse in this city, and I decided not to continue photographing the subsequent phases for fear of damaging the camera sensor. --Wilfredor (talk) 19:48, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Aw, come on! Why did you mirror the sequence in the first place if you weren't trying to make it appear as if you had photographed the whole eclipse? Nothing about this or fear for a damaged sensor was mentioned before I called this image out. How many times are you going to pull these photoshop tricks on us and then try to back-track with scant explanations and whatever. You need to do some serious thinking about how you make and present photos on this forum.
I know from what you wrote on your previous nom, that you are in a really bad place in life right now, but you still need to go by the same rules and critique as everyone else here if you participate. --Cart (talk) 20:14, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believed that the Earth would continue moving in its usual direction, and my actions were guided by that assumption, not by any malintent. As soon as I recognized the potential for misunderstanding (Poco a poco comment), I promptly clarified that the images might be perceived as representing different phases. I initially didn't address this because the similarities seemed so self-evident to me—both images feature identical shapes and solar spots, mirroring each other perfectly. Even the thumbnails, without being opened to full size, clearly show these inversions. I had assumed these parallels would be apparent for everybody. I've noticed that the more I try to explain, the more complicated situations seem to become, which often leads me to prefer silence. Moving forward, I will make an effort to articulate even those details I consider self-evident, though I can't promise to always do so. This isn't an issue unique to FPC; it's something I've encountered in personal interactions as well. Misunderstandings like these are a problem I'm aware of and continually striving to overcome. Wilfredor (talk) 20:32, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps you should try to get some professional help during this trying time for you. Even though your friends are here on FPC to support you, non of us can give you adequate advice that anyone who is going through bad times needs. I also notice that this is your third active nomination, and it should have been {{FPD}}-ed. I'm not going to add to your troubles by using that template, but please think about if you can handle critique here for now. Please take care of yourself and do not put yourself in situations that might be stressful for you. Best, --Cart (talk) 11:18, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I really hope you can find some good help. If photography gives you comfort and a sense of continuity, keep uploading photos on Commons and visit your friends here on talk pages instead. I'm sure that more people than I want to support you to get better. --Cart (talk) 11:30, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wilfredor: don't give it up, you're still one of the best photographers here. ★ 16:17, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Solar_eclipse_on_April_8,_2024_in_Québec_city,_pano.jpg&oldid=870461845"