Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2017 E-papieros mod 1.jpg

File:2017 E-papieros mod 1.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jan 2017 at 13:31:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:2017 E-papieros mod 1.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2017 E-papieros mod 1.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
•  Info All by me -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 13:31, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 13:31, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment I'm in favor of turning it to be vertical so the display can be easily read. Which would also require removing the drop shadows and creating a mask for a pure white background. I can do it, but I'll give Jacek Halicki a chance to do it himself. – Lucas 17:39, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

  @Lucas: I think it's a bad idea. Vertical photo will look unnatural due to the line of the fluid level in an atomiser. Besides in Wikipedia look better horizontal photos. As for the background is I do not like pictures of the cleared background, IMO look unnatural, in practice such a background does not exist. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 17:57, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

•  Support --Llez (talk) 21:48, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 08:47, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Neutral I'm not convinced about the orientation, would have preferred to have the top higher than the body. Furthermore the subject itself is not wowing to me Poco² 09:37, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:08, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose The orientation and presentation fails to inspire me at all. Wrt Lucas point, I don't favour such photoshopping as extracting an image with a mask. It nearly always looks fake and is hard to do without tell-tale edges. Better to learn how to shoot an object with a white background in the first place. -- Colin (talk) 12:26, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose because of orientation and general lack of wow. I would rather consider this as VI --Uoaei1 (talk) 14:55, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose I have to agree with the others here. Vertical would've been better in my opinion; if you stood it on its end, and made it symmetrical. -- Thennicke (talk) 09:13, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Thennicke. Technically leaves little to be desired, but I think a readable display would help. Daniel Case (talk) 19:08, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
•  I withdraw my nomination --Jacek Halicki (talk) 19:56, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:43, 27 January 2017 (UTC)