Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Osteospermum-ecklonis.jpg

Info created by Mark Schellhase - uploaded by Mark Schellhase - nominated by Calibas 01:43, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Calibas 01:43, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, I don't like the composition (DOF) or the lighting on this one. --Dori - Talk 03:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I think the composition is fine, it is maybe the best element in the picture. What I deslike is the shallow DOF, leaving most part of the main subject unfocused (f/2.8, 1/500 ??) -- Alvesgaspar 08:32, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Alvesgaspar, DOF is really too shallow. At least the whole foreground flower should have been in focus. Lycaon 08:57, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support hm..i think i like it...maybe a bit more DOF would have been better. But I think the composition works because of the shallow DOF. Btw: Isn't the DOF part of the composition? --AngMoKio 14:05, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I have the highest respect for his picture but the whole foreground flower should have been in focus. --Richard Bartz 15:40, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question Why whole foreground of flower should have been in focus? Center of flower is sharp. --D kuba 16:59, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, the flower in front should be 100% sharp, not the foreground of the flower. --Richard Bartz 18:15, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose DOF, but not in the sense the others think. I believe that such a dof as now is almost perfect, as it isolates the main subject - the flower in front. But the main subject would have to be as perfect as an FP flower usually is, which it is not as 100% of it is not in focus. Freedom to share 20:18, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as Freedom to share (talk · contribs) - I like the idea, but I think this one flower should be 100% sharp --Leafnode 12:50, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2 support, 6 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 10:44, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Navigation menu