Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Cucullie de la scrofulaire MHNT Chenille.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Apr 2014 at 22:02:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Info created & uploaded by Ercé - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 22:02, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
- Support -- Tomer T (talk) 22:02, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
- Support --P e z i (talk) 22:14, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
- Support I wish a portrait frame showing more of the leaf (?) below. Jee 03:58, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful. —ATinySliver/ATalkPage 04:00, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose Yes it`s a beatiful caterpillar, but the quality is insufficient for a featured macro imo. The very high ISO (why???) is too visible for me. --mathias K 11:21, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
- Support It's a very nice picture that needs my vote to counter the pixel peeper's vote above :) --Baykedevries (talk) 13:14, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
- Haha, very funny! There is no pixel peeping in my comment! If you would spend some time to have a look through some of our featured macros you should see that this quality isn`t the best commons has to offer! --mathias K 15:24, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
- Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:06, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful.--JOAQUIND 17:06, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
- Support Nice. --Karelj (talk) 17:41, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
- Support pleasantly surprised: Tomer chose well! -Ercé (talk) 17:48, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
- Support --Mile (talk) 19:55, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
- Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 20:39, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Oppose There's no way that I can give a "2nd consideration" to this. I don't think the lighting condition under which this photo was shot warrants such a high ISO of 2500. Neither does the caterpillar move so fast that there would be any harm done if the noise is reduced to between 800-1600, rendering a slow shutter speed of below 1/100 (perhaps try 1/60). An otherwise nice photo and caterpillar.--(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 03:38, 29 March 2014 (UTC)- Support Considering Ercé's information below, I would change my vote to support. Good effort. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 09:20, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
- Info Figwort is very high and its leaves are very movable by slightest breath of wind. --Ercé (talk) 07:44, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
- Support --JLPC (talk) 08:22, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
- Support FP to me, still I believe that the noise/sharpness balance could be improve reducing the noise level Poco2 15:13, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
- Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:33, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose Great compo and specimen, but noise level is too high for me. --Ivar (talk) 18:02, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose per Ivar. And an additional flash would had been a useful thing in this situation. Kruusamägi (talk) 02:03, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
- Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 18:44, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods