Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Osteospermum Flower Power Spider Purple 2134px.jpg

Image:Osteospermum Flower Power Spider Purple 2134px.jpg, featured

•  Info Created, uploaded, and nominated by Ram-Man
•  Support A beautiful Osteospermum cultivar. -- Ram-Man 21:39, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Now that is what a picture of a flower is supposed to look like. --Ltz Raptor (talk) 21:41, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Question - A good one, Derek! But I can't believe you used f/2.8 and 1/1600 ... -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:06, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
  •  Info This flower is very flat, so it was mainly a matter of camera positioning (I had no tripod). As you can see, a few of the tips are slightly out of focus, but not enough to be distracting, and certainly not enough to degrade its usefulness. Also, this lens is spectacularly sharp wide open. Since this was shot straight down, the large aperture eliminated the background. -- Ram-Man 22:11, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:18, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --Tintero (talk) 22:34, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --MichaelMaggs (talk) 06:46, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --AngMoKio (talk) 07:29, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose the blurry ends distract --SuperJew (talk) 10:24, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --Böhringer (talk) 11:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Albertus teolog (talk) 16:37, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
•  SupportAlvaro qc (talk) 21:36, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
•  SupportMrmariokartguy (talk) 22:07, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Nice.--Sensl (talk) 21:35, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
•  Comment I really wish people would put more of the fower into the shots. I find these flower-head-only pictures kind of boring and less encyclopedic than they could be. Somewhat more irrelevantly, I also wish the Wikipedia thumbnail software didn't create all those ugly artefacts around the flower head - look between two of the petals in the thumbnail. It sure doesn't look like that at full size! Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:06, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
  • I'd love to do it, but they almost always fail. When it comes to plants, reviewers here are often extremely picky. -- Ram-Man 00:06, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
    • True, I suppose. But I'm not sure I like where it's led us - flower heads abstracted from their surroundings or any other part of the plant. I don't want to oppose - it's a very good photo. I just wish that the situation was not such that what used to be a minority is now, say, 70% of the flower photos we get. Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:54, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
•  Support -- DarkAp89  Commons 08:05, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --Simonizer (talk) 17:13, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --Avala (talk) 19:48, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --Sailko (talk) 16:12, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --Kadellar (talk) 19:17, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

result: 16 supports, 1 oppose, 1 neutral => featured. Benh (talk) 18:42, 9 September 2008 (UTC)