Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Goiaba vermelha.jpg

File:Goiaba vermelha.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2014 at 11:58:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Goiaba vermelha.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Goiaba vermelha.jpg

•  Info created by Rodrigo.Argenton - uploaded by Rodrigo.Argenton - nominated by Rodrigo.Argenton -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 11:58, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
•  Support -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 11:58, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
•  Support ArionEstar (talk) 12:26, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
•  Neutral The light and composition and the entire setup is very pro-looking and nice shadow too. It is, however, not as detailed and crisp as I would expect, even considering the large pixelage of 16 Mpixels. There is sort of a washed out appearance to the fruit. I am wondering is this is because the diffraction limit has been hit with an aperture of f/16? I do not now the exact shooting distance, but it is my feeling one could have opened the aperture to something like f/13 without significant loss of DOF. Focus stacking would have been another option. -- Slaunger (talk) 10:02, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• @Slaunger: Thank for your opinion, in this case f/16 + 50mm lens, this is my sharpest lens, but it's a 125.99 USD lens, and I think that I tried f/13, but DOF became prohibitive, see the File:Maracujá em fundo preto (2).JPG; I will try focus bracketing for future photos, but I broke my clamp lamp, so nothing soon. Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 15:02, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

•  Comment light and colors are a bit flat. -- Christian Ferrer ^Talk 12:04, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• @Christian Ferrer: Thank for opinion, but how could I solve that? Have any technique that could I use to improve this photo? Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 15:02, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton, I think a very small and subtle increase of the whites, local highlights and of the vibrance can improve the image, of course by being reasonable with the increase. -- Christian Ferrer ^Talk 18:10, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

•  Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 08:10, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
•  Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 14:01, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
•  Comment @Rafaeloliveira22 the latest edition is horrible, the cut was grotesque. Excuse my claim in those terms but it was comparable to a mutilation. Yes I'm screaming, but amiably, : ) -- Lauro Sirgado^contribs 22:49, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

  Lauro Sirgado I had to revert that... all the work in the reflection disappeared... Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 05:11, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

• "Bem melhor assim!" I believe that you should make the suggested changes, I did a test and gets better. -- Lauro Sirgado^contribs 14:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

• @Lauro Sirgado: Christian Ferrer, could you do that alterations? Cause I tried and I couldn't improve. Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (talk) 20:14, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

• Rodrigo.Argenton  Done I uploaded it, revert if you don't like. -- Christian Ferrer ^Talk 21:28, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Christian Ferrer whoops, sry, had not seen his version loaded, shame ,already reverted -- Lauro Sirgado^contribs 22:19, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
•  Support -- Christian Ferrer ^Talk 12:17, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
•  Support -- Lauro Sirgado^contribs 14:15, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Jee 08:17, 6 October 2014 (UTC)