Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Samsung WB350F front.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Samsung WB350F front.jpg, not featured
[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2020 at 23:48:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Optical devices
Info created by Samaung - uploaded by clpo13 - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 23:48, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Support -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 23:48, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Oppose Probably a deserved VI but I don't think there is anything outstanding about it for FP. In 'studio conditions' photographing an inanimate object like this is not the most challenging thing, so I would want real perfection in composition and image quality. With this shot I like the gradient in the background, and the composition is OK although I'd kinda prefer a view at an angle rather than have the camera facing straight. But the image quality is not very high. Not terrible, but IMO too noisy for a 10.5mpx image. Cmao20 (talk) 01:41, 24 August 2020 (UTC)- Support--shizhao (talk) 07:02, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose per Cmao20. --Peulle (talk) 08:07, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose way too noisy for a studio shot --El Grafo (talk) 12:53, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry, but an object photographed in a studio should look much more 3-dimensional and the white balance should be much better.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Augustgeyler (talk • contribs)
- Oppose Blown highlights and too soft. Daniel Case (talk) 03:01, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 08:14, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
