Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Reindeer in Kebnekaise.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Image:Reindeer in Kebnekaise.jpg, not featured[edit]
Info created, uploaded and nominated by Nattfodd --Nattfodd 17:28, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Support --Nattfodd 17:28, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Oppose Composition and framing. The back half of the Reindeer is cropped and it takes up exactly half the picture, which ruins the composition for me. --Digon3 talk 17:43, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
- That's what makes it work for me. It gives the impression that the reindeer is just entering the frame and adds quite a lot of dynamism to the composition, imo. --Nattfodd 18:02, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose It's a photo, not a movie, my friend :-) (did you ever consider joining the cinema industry?) The composition is supposed to be spot-on. I can perfectly see what you are trying to achieve, but sorry, that just doesn't work. It looks like you tried to shoot it as a sequence of many pictures using burst mode or something. Tell me if I guessed right :-) Freedom to share 20:34, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
- No, you're completely wrong, sorry. And it's not because a photography is a static image that it can't have a dynamic composition and give an impression of movement. A trivial example is a photo of a car with motion blur. --Nattfodd 08:45, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
- Dynamic composition is a term I understand, but I feel that a reindeer running or something like that would convey a much greater expression of movement. I see that you tried hard, but the first time I saw that image, the thought "Oh, that reindeer is in movement" did not instantly enter my head if you see what I mean. Look at
. Now that is a good example of a reindeer in movement (excellent photography, by the way :) ). It has a good composition, it is shown in its natural habitat, you can see that it is walking and you can see the whole of it. Freedom to share 15:24, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
- Dynamic composition is a term I understand, but I feel that a reindeer running or something like that would convey a much greater expression of movement. I see that you tried hard, but the first time I saw that image, the thought "Oh, that reindeer is in movement" did not instantly enter my head if you see what I mean. Look at
- No, you're completely wrong, sorry. And it's not because a photography is a static image that it can't have a dynamic composition and give an impression of movement. A trivial example is a photo of a car with motion blur. --Nattfodd 08:45, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
- That's what makes it work for me. It gives the impression that the reindeer is just entering the frame and adds quite a lot of dynamism to the composition, imo. --Nattfodd 18:02, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose ack Digon3. -- Lycaon 08:03, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose Composition, part of animal missing. --Karelj 18:24, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose Composition. --MichaelMaggs 21:57, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose Jhowcs 02:16, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- Please add a rationale for opposition as per guidelines as a courtesy to the nominator. Lycaon 07:00, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer 09:57, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
