Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Taro leaf underside, backlit by sun - edit.jpg

File:Taro leaf underside, backlit by sun - edit.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2010 at 00:17:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Taro leaf underside, backlit by sun - edit.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Taro leaf underside, backlit by sun - edit.jpg

•  Info created, uploaded and nominated by Avenue -- Avenue (talk) 00:17, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Support -- Avenue (talk) 00:17, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Support A bit on the noisy side, bu excellent pic nonetheless. However, why does the metadata say the ISO rating is zero? --The High Fin Sperm Whale 01:33, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

• That camera leaves the ISO field blank. I'm not sure why it's showing as zero now, though. --Avenue (talk) 02:30, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

•  Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 10:14, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Very original composition, super sharp picture. --Murdockcrc (talk) 15:52, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Support - Like it Basvb (talk) 18:25, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment Superb light, dof and composition. Great wow, but I am a bit concerned that you have turned the contrast knob too much to make it look so surreal. The original is very good too, and I think it appears to be a much truer (but still fascinating) representation of the backlit leaf. --Slaunger (talk) 22:04, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

• A very fair point. I wondered about this too. All I can say is that I was a little disappointed in the original, with its glare and somewhat washed-out colours, and that this edited version feels truer to my experience of the leaf's glow. --Avenue (talk) 00:19, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

•  Support Is it OK to use doping in sports ? Well, this is somewhat a doped photo I think. But, if you say that the edited version feels truer to your experience of the leafs glow, I believe you. And sometimes you need to bend reality a bit to catch the viewer. And you have really managed that in this case. Amazing. --Slaunger (talk) 07:19, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

•  Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 23:38, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Kooritza (talk) 15:33, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Great picture but unfortunately not really sharp --Dein Freund der Baum (talk) 21:39, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose I was to support, but I think it is not sharp enough at High res, especially the details of the stem. Trully sorry, because it is a great picture.--Jebulon (talk) 17:24, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

•  CommentIn my opinion it really cannot be much sharper and still have this very unique "artistic look", which makes it such a great picture. I think that sometimes one has to throw pixel beancounting overboard for the higher sake of the overall impression. Because, I agree with you, that if sharpness is considered as an isolated property it is not overwhelmingly good. --Slaunger (talk) 08:03, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

• I agree, that's why I hesitated a lot... Maybe I have supported this in a photograph contest, but here is "Commons"...--Jebulon (talk) 10:59, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) I can't claim it was entirely planned, but after taking the shot I felt that the unfocussed main stem coming towards the camera helped add depth to what's otherwise quite a flat picture. But I respect the opinions of those who oppose. --Avenue (talk) 11:05, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

• Yes, whether it works for the individual reviewer is, very much dependent on the personal preferences and likings, which is just fine. --Slaunger (talk) 21:05, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

•  Support Beautiful and unique! -- TFCforever (talk) 02:30, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Leaf veins always have interesting patterns, and you've brought them out in a well composed overall shot. Thank you. --99of9 (talk) 11:40, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose The lighting is not the best in my opinion. Something about it is really off, either it's too soft or the contrast has been manipulated, I'm not sure. Steven Walling 19:18, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose -- Its a hard to tak picture but i think it needs more contrast or somewhat to make me say wow. Mulazimoglu (talk) 09:06, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Support -- VS (talk) 17:04, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Support --Snaevar (talk) 13:42, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:02, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants