Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Diffraction pattern in spiderweb.JPG

Image:Diffraction pattern in spiderweb.JPG, not featured

•  InfoDiffraction pattern in a spiderweb. You could find the explanation to this phenomena here and here created, uploaded and nominated by Mbz1 --Mbz1 01:05, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Comment Please notice the subjest is not a spiderweb, but Diffraction pattern in a spiderweb. If you click at the first link from Info, you could read why it is better to take such images out of focus. I've done more than this. The image shows different parts of a spiderweb with different ammount of out of focus volume in order to represent the subject better. In my opinion it is a very nice educational image and maybe a new topic for FP.--Mbz1 01:05, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --Mbz1 01:05, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support That is definately fascinating, there is obvious scientific merit to the photo and the colours are especially vibrant because of the black background. --User: MarcusObal 02:32, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose --Poromiami 05:39, 3 October 2007 (UTC) Nice colours, but the quality is poor... Not FP material.
  • Could you, please be a litlle bit more specific and tell me what quality is poor. Thanks.--Mbz1 07:49, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose Nice but, not fp focus and noise. --Beyond silence 08:45, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Oh, no focus you said. I wonder, if you've read and understood what I explained in my comment or you simply vote without understanding the subject?--Mbz1 12:16, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I understand you, may a better word is DOF. --Beyond silence 14:33, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Focus and DoF are related concepts, as DoF is a way to "measure" the amount of area in sharp focus. At this point there is no reason for confusion, as many reviewers interchange these concepts. -- Ram-Man 23:23, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

•  Support --Karelj 21:37, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Wow. Doodle-doo Ħ 22:03, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --Very interesting phenomena. Support for the educational interest well captured and the composition which gives the photograph also an artistic interest. Of course, for those who search only a picture of a spiderweb, better for them not to vote here because it's not the subject. Bravo ! Sting 22:57, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose - The surface of a CD is a much better depiction of this kind of phenomenon - Alvesgaspar 23:02, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Sure, yet the nominated image demonstrates the phenomena in the Nature. Just think about it!It was done without men involevement just by a spider, his web and the Sun. It is still not completely understood how it works with spider webs. That's why in my opinion it is much more interesting than the same phenomena seen on CDs surface. Besides I'm sure it will be very interesting for kids. One more reason in favor of this image - everybody have seen diffraction pattern in CDs, very few ever heard about diffraction pattern in a spider web. I'd like to thank everybody for the votes and comments--Mbz1 23:45, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose Meets the criteria for value, but lacks sufficient quality (noise and focus). -- Ram-Man 23:23, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose Not valuable, low q, noise, out off focus. Acarpentier 02:46, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Welcome back, Acarpentier.Glad to see you around once again. Let's better not to talk about the value of the image, OK? Better tell us, if you got've any new "co-workers" so far?--Mbz1 13:44, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Hey I never leaved. ;) I think it's not valuable, if you dont want comments don't post. Please read the Guidelines for nominators. Acarpentier 21:45, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid you did not understand what I meant, when I said:"Let's better not to talk about the value of the image". The thing is that, if a person, who has no idea about the subject of the image,sees it for the very first time and even have not read the explanation, starts to discuss the image's value, this person looks laughable and ludicrous. For your info the subject of the image is studied by scientists around the world and people, who understand call the image remarkable and a very good example. Please notice I love, when I get votes on my images (opposes or supports). So, please do keep your opposes coming, but try not to be laughable and ludicrous .--Mbz1 01:27, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

•  Support albeit weak, but support because of real educational interest --Ben^hello! 11:54, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
•  

result: withdrawn => not featured. --Ben^chat 06:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)