Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ocean beach at low tide against the sun.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Nov 2010 at 12:45:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Info everything by Mbz1 -- Mbz1 (talk) 12:45, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
- Info The image was not practically post processed. It was taken against the sun, and the colors came from the settings I used.
- Support -- Mbz1 (talk) 12:45, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support --Avenue (talk) 12:55, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:01, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose
per comment of Grinatyou.. Mbz1 you have much better images than this one. Ggia (talk) 15:39, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
- Comment I was too lazy to write comments and I followed the comments of Grinatyou.. Here are my comments: The image is too dark for me, has unnatural colors (probably during the settings of the camera and the contra-light conditions), no details in the bird (only silhouette). The form of the image (actually only form we see here) does not convince me (I don't find the composition well-balanced). Images like that (that actually we see only form / shadows) are better in black & white. This image lacks of color and a black & white version will be more interesting.. with dark parts, white parts, middle gray tones etc. But since the contrast is too high I don't know if this image succeed in b&w (because it misses middle tones - this is usually a problems of digital sensors that have low dynamic range). As I mentioned above Mbz1 has much better images than this one. Ggia (talk) 08:34, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Well everybody could come here and say: "I see technical problems, composition problems, lack of value" without saying what the problems are. And I am not looking forward for clarification of that review because according to the user, if he "explains them in detail it would be abusive". I do have much better images than this one, but it is not a reason to oppose this one I guess. It's OK, no worries --Mbz1 (talk) 16:53, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose –hoverFly | chat? 17:14, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose -- Resimdeki kuş cinsini ayırt edebilmek için daha yakından çekilmiş olması şart. Bu durumda öğreticilik faktörü az. Siyah beyaz olması da artistik açı dışında resme bir özellik katmamış. Bence seçkin olması için zorlanmaması gereken alelade bir resim. Ancak yine de hoş. Mulazimoglu (talk) 17:39, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
- It is not black and white picture! It is only photographed against the sun. O siyah beyaz bir resim değil! Sadece güneşe karşı fotoğraflandı olduğunu.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:49, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry, very good quality, and I'm sure it would do well in any photo contest, but I don't see much educational value here. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 18:04, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
- It is added to 4 categories! Of course there's a value. Even, if it was an image of ocean waves only, there would have been a value. --Mbz1 (talk) 18:08, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
- And three more by me, but...--Jebulon (talk) 11:04, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- It is added to 4 categories! Of course there's a value. Even, if it was an image of ocean waves only, there would have been a value. --Mbz1 (talk) 18:08, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support Good use of composition technique. --nsaum75¡שיחת! 18:35, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support High quality, fine image. Stellarkid (talk) 04:13, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support I usually don't like b/w images and find them very useless, but this one is superb! Very nice composition, good quality. Not strong support because the educational value is really a bit low, but not 100% not there (e.g. Grayscale, Black-and-white, Waves, Ocean Beach, San Francisco, California, ...) --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 09:13, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support Per Carschten. And b/w in this case is perfect problem solving with very harsh lighting. Nice result. --George Chernilevsky talk 13:05, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support I'm astonished to see the success of Mbz1 in this photo. I'm used to lousy images when taking them against the sun, but this one is amazing. Fantastic work. Kooritza (talk) 15:24, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support Thought a while about this one. Personally, I perhaps do not see as much value in it as many others, but the visualization of the sea is really intriguing. The sea almost looks like thick, black oil. Very interesting and quite dramatic to look at. I can almost hear the waves breaking. --Slaunger (talk) 22:18, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 01:08, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support --Cayambe (talk) 09:06, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
NeutralI would like to support, but "Commons" is not (only) a photography contest. This one is absolutely aesthetically wonderful, but, as say the guidelines "Be aware that beautiful does not means always valuable". It is my opinion that value lacks here.--Jebulon (talk) 14:36, 21 November 2010 (UTC)- Info The bird on this image is really easy to ID. I did not know what bird it was because I am not a birder, so I asked Walt, and he made a correct ID right away. This image has a value--Mbz1 (talk) 15:25, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support per kaʁstn excepted the point that I find B/W images often only useless, not very useless... Ah, it could be used educationally in teaching compositional photographic ideas and rules, so saying ithis image has no educational value is not true for me. Grand-Duc (talk) 02:08, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support Not bad. --Karelj (talk) 20:51, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose Lacks EV. "Beautiful does not always mean valuable". Many spots seem underexposed, and its EV could be stronger in color rather than monochrome or black and white. - LeavXC (talk) 03:14, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
- This is not black and white image. The colors came from settings and mostly because it was taken against the sun. The image was practically not post processed.--03:23, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
- - I don't have any complaints with necessary post-processing (it's a major part of digital photography). However, the picture contains little or no color (hence it is a monochrome or black-and-white photo). Perhaps you used the "Monochrome" Picture Style setting on your Rebel XTi? LeavXC (talk) 04:15, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
- No, I used no special settings at all.--Mbz1 (talk) 04:23, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
- - I don't have any complaints with necessary post-processing (it's a major part of digital photography). However, the picture contains little or no color (hence it is a monochrome or black-and-white photo). Perhaps you used the "Monochrome" Picture Style setting on your Rebel XTi? LeavXC (talk) 04:15, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose Bland colours. --99of9 (talk) 22:46, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose Beautiful waves and a bird, even at contre-jour, is not enough to convince me to feature this one in "Commons". I change my "neutral" to an "oppose".--Jebulon (talk) 16:39, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
- Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 23:43, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 15:00, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural