Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:A bad sales day.jpg

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

File:A bad sales day.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2016 at 17:00:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A bad sales day
Let me see if I can remove it --The Photographer 21:43, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Another possibility would be to include more and not crop out part of the bags. I understand cart's point about them being part of the street scene and serving as a counterweight, if you want that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:04, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I simply removed it because regrettablythe raw file was in a Beria hard drive that stopped working recently. Please, let me know if it is better or need rollback, thanks --The Photographer 23:22, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Better for me, not sure about others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:03, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@PetarM: I find this amount of noise in a image taken at ISO 100 unacceptable, and it is really is how my old D300 can genuinely be expected to perform and I've half a mind to sell it someday in mercadolibre. I really like the way the D300 handles, but the actual end results are, frankly, disappointing. I tend to accept that, but also I will say that this camera has a lot of other features and capabilities that can not be provided by any other camera on the price range so full of benefits that this ISO 100 noise is a very very small problem. If you look at the histogram of everything is at the bottom half of the histogram. While this isn't underexposed and even when well exposed the D300 can show noise in shadow areas. I have compared this camera to other D300s and my conclusion is that there is a problem. My shoots are raws and admittedly, the D300 is always a bit muddy... and at higher ISO's a bit smudgy. --The Photographer 21:40, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Don't let yourself be carried by the river (votes), my recommendation is, if you do not feel that this image should be featured on the first impression, there is no simply reason, you could vote negative using "no wow". --The Photographer 23:28, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree. I actually think that the so called "wow-factor" is a rather poor expression since it doesn't cover all the emotions a pic can bring out. I tend to think -Could this photo belong in a National Geographic or Time Magazine article? If so, it should be a FP, it's a photo that makes you look twice or even three times. cart-Talk 15:10, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • It all depends - up to a viewer. Neither NG shots are so good, i suppose some half would be out of FP. Or look at most expensive photographs - i would not dare to nominate some 70-80%. Macro shooter and urban have different world, not much in common. So if I see NG and Time fire photographers and use free Wiki i wont be surprised. --Mile (talk) 15:52, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support per INC and cart's comments on Charles's oppose. I would add that while the image of the man alone would be enough for me to support, putting him in the context of his environment and that striking diagonal perspective line ups the wow for me. Not only does it increase the aesthetic attraction, it dramatizes the man's situation, that he is at odds with the order of the world he is in. Daniel Case (talk) 17:37, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Just a man on the street, I doesn't see any encyclopedic interest there, sorry. Jiel (talk) 23:46, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment The man's face is not in focus. If this type of human interest image has aspirations then it should be technically spot on. Better now that garbage has gone. Charles (talk) 12:49, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Charlesjsharp: The photo is static too, so I certainly agree with your point about sharpness/quality. lNeverCry 15:15, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
PS:The name of the photo induces the reader to one thing that could not be true, did you talk to him? You seems far from him, and photo is about connection, specially people's photos; I couldn't connect with him, the empathy is hampered here.
FYI, you can see the explain about the noise UP --The Photographer 16:52, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to believe that is not true:Category:Taken with Nikon D300, specially when we select:
Maybe a contact with Michael Gäbler could improve your technical deficiency...
-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 18:42, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Rodrigo.Argenton: If you think a 250$ camera is enough, why are you asking for a 2000 $ camera to WMF?, btw, I could have lent you my camera to do that job --The Photographer 19:01, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Complete out of the topic, I'm not in discussion here, you are not in discussion here, your photo is.
This reaction is showing ignorance about photography, and Wiki, as there a talk page there, where I answered the same questions to your dear friend Rodrigo Padula, same questions...
And the photos up here was made with the same camera in your hands, not noisy at ISO 200, not as noisy as your photos at ISO 400... so grow up, and assume responsibilities and criticism.
-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 19:16, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You are comparing different photography genders (Street photography and nature closeup photography in animals) and probably under different conditions like for example a different light, lens.. and making a personal attack calling my "technical deficiency". It is not the first time you insist on your behavior disrespectful, please stop, I do not want to see you blocked again. --The Photographer 19:25, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I love treats, but make it in the a appropriate page:
User talk:Rodrigo.Argenton
This is not a personal attack, this is a statement based in what you are delivering here, complete based in your work and inabilities.
All people here have technical deficiencies, we are not god... wait, do you think that you don't have? :D hehehehe
And yes, it's more difficult situations in the animal photos, and stills better...
-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 19:50, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /lNeverCry 00:36, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:A_bad_sales_day.jpg&oldid=225491441"