Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Джинсовая ткань (изнаночная сторона).jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

File:Джинсовая ткань (изнаночная сторона).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2021 at 21:00:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  •  Comment Perhaps someone knows how to contact him. Magnification is scientifically quite important, and also important for use in an encyclopedia if Wikipedians would want to use it, wouldn't you say? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:07, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can't figure out what an increase can do, I don't have the baggage of knowledge in materials science, but ..... Is it not obvious to you what is shown in the photo? :) JukoFF (talk) 18:26, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment If you're confident it's around 50x, give or take, we can add that information to the file description and hope Mr. Klepnev edits it to 49x or whatever later this year. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:23, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • This looks just like cotton fiber. [1] Even the dye looks right. Indigo will stay on the surface of natural fibers. That is why you can stonewash a pair of jeans to rub away the dye. Most artificial fibers have the color absorbed into the very fiber. I have done a lot of dyeing in my days, especially indigo, and this looks ok to me. Oh, and btw, denim can be thread dyed or fabric dyed. Some denims are woven from indigo dyed and white thread for a different look. The jeans I'm wearing right now are woven just like in the photo. --Cart (talk) 21:51, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Cart, I removed your second link as my antivirus blocked it as a site containing malware (possibly hijacked). Ok, so the cotton fibre can be more regular than I expected, but I'm still confused (a) that it appears see-through and (b) that it is in fact in colour given that when I google "cotton fiber microscope" I get scanning electron microscope images of similar thread, which of course have no colour. Btw, as this note and this note, a description like "50x" only makes sense for images like this if you specify the size of the image you are looking at (e.g. 8"x10" print or longest side 25mm). Why can't I find similar pictures to this? -- Colin (talk) 18:41, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Colin, cotton fibers are actually tranclusent, almost transparent, as are most fibers when you get down on a microscopic level. Most photographers take advantage of this and shoot cotton fiber in polarizing light, just like you have done with clear plastic objects. Google "cotton fiber microscope polarizing", or even alamy and you get a nice selection of photos.
When identifying fibers, you can't go by if they are transparent or opaque to determine if they are natural or manmade. General rule of thumb: If they have a complex structure, are twisted or have scales, they are grown (by animals or plants). If they are long smooth and look like some sort of pasta, they are extruded. Manmade fibers are extruded in some shape and so are silk and spiderweb (silkworms and spider don't "grow" their thread, they extrude it). This page sums it up rather well. --Cart (talk) 19:18, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 21:14, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Джинсовая_ткань_(изнаночная_сторона).jpg&oldid=528425039"