Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bust of Wilhelmine of Bayreuth.jpg

File:Bust of Wilhelmine of Bayreuth.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Mar 2015 at 16:20:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Bust of Wilhelmine of Bayreuth.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bust of Wilhelmine of Bayreuth.jpg

•  Info bust by Gabriele Plössner, everything else by me -- El Grafo (talk) 16:20, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
•  Support -- El Grafo (talk) 16:20, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Detailed, nicely lighted, not blown. I think worth giving a try. -- Pofka (talk) 16:31, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
  •  Comment What does "give it a try" mean here? Either it is among our very best for you, or it isn’t. It does not have to prove anything once it is featured, so you don’t "give it a chance" by voting for it. --Kreuzschnabel 21:00, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

• There were many poor pictures of this genre recently and this one really caught my eye. It really is among MY bests of this genre. For sure, it wouldn't be best among the featured pictures, but I wouldn't mind if it was there. That's why I wished to give it a try. -- Pofka (talk) 22:55, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

•  Oppose Not special enough, from a photographic point of view, to give it the star. Background, although having a nice bokeh, is not blurred enough to my tastes. And that spider web... - Benh (talk) 20:37, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

•  Comment Thank you, Benh, for your review. It is very much appreciated and I can see you point. Concerning the background, just for your information: The original bokeh was actually pretty ugly, so I artificially blurred the background (see file history). I did not blur it more because I wanted to keep the building recognizable: there is a strong historical connection between the person and the building (Wilhelmine was the driving force behind the construction of the Opera house). --El Grafo (talk) 12:25, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

•  Comment I’d choose a greater focal length and distance to place the statue closer to the house. Then, a tripod to get everything straight, manual focusing, the optimum aperture (where did you get that f/0 lens?), and *click* :-) Bring some reflectors along so you can brighten the bust, I think that would add wow. --Kreuzschnabel 12:40, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

• Sounds like a plan ;-) Thanks a lot, I think I'm going to try that at some time. I used an old M42 mount lens with a K-mount adapter. Love that lens, but it doesn't report the aperture to the camera, which for some reason results in f/0 in the EXIF data (I guess I should remove that). I usually take notes to fix it manually, but on that day things got confused :-/ All I can say is that it was pretty close to (but not completely) wide open (which could explain the softness at the borders = plaque). --El Grafo (talk) 13:08, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

•  Oppose I see nothing exceptional. The bust itself is of appropriate quality but not more, while the plaque does not even exceed phonecam level. Background tilted. --Kreuzschnabel 21:00, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

•  Comment Thank you as well, Kreuzschnabel. This is one of my all time favorite images I've uploaded so far, but it seems like that's because of (irrational) reasons that don't apply to other persons than me. Is there an English word for Betriebsblindheit? I can't argue with the points you raise, just one note: The background is not really tilted, it's due to the perspective (compare this file). But that's of course difficult (if not impossible) to see from my image. --El Grafo (talk) 12:25, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

•  I withdraw my nomination Now that Kreuzschnabel has pointed out the issue with the plague, I realize that this was the main reason I didn't nominate it earlier. Let's get realistic: That alone is reason enough to oppose. Thanks for your honest reviews and sorry for wasting your time. Cheers, El Grafo (talk) 12:25, 5 March 2015 (UTC)