Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Solenostomus paradoxus black.jpg

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

Image:Solenostomus paradoxus black.jpg, featured[edit]

It's not actually taken in the dark. It was taken during the day under water. It was the first time I used my new camera under water and I found that for close up macro shots, using flash, the background became black where there was only water. I was quite pleased with this image as the natural black color of the fish made it blend in and only its fluorescent colors came through. I think it shows why it's called a "Ghost" pipefish. --Jnpet 16:16, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm actually getting this one framed. I did a little check on the black background effect and it seems it's a common phenomenon when taking close up macro shots with flash for digital cameras. It seems too, that amongst professional photographers, there is some disagreement if this should be considered good or bad, where some are liking the effect and creating like images (mainly macro shots of insects and flowers), while others are completely discouraging this kind of photography. The fact that some professionals are embracing this as an acceptable technic, and pursuing the effect, it seems to me that it has some value and shouldn't be considered to be a "failed flash" picture. If fault is to be found, it would be that the subject itself is black and therefore blends in with the background leaving only the wonderful ghostly fluorescent colors. If the subject was more colorful, it would also have been a great shot. I guess in this case it comes down to taste. This one certainly had the "wow" factor for me. --Jnpet 06:32, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Lycaon. You made it clear with your initial vote and reason why you didn’t agree to this being featured. And I agreed with some of what you had to say, but with the, (required for promotion), fifth support vote, you now seem to be actively campaigning for “oppose” votes to ensure this doesn’t get promoted. I don’t see you attacking anyone else’s images with such vigor, and I have been told it’s not personal, but I’m not sure how else to take it. Anyway, I’ll give you the benefit of doubt and assume you sincerely just hate this one picture. So, let me now point out once again that the image itself has no technical flaws. It was done with close up flash macro shot, a technique which some professional photographers use. It has already been pointed out that the flaw if any is that it blends in to the background which is what creates the ghostly image. This in my opinion is the “wow” factor. Now looking at some of your examples you provided, I agree that they have better defined outlines, but none of them would ever pass FP. Or are you saying you consider them to be FP material? Well, what ever your opinion might be on that subject, you have already made your thoughts known once on the image in question. I appreciate and accept that, but I do not appreciate you campaigning against it just because there seems to be a majority who also like the image and voted for it. If, in the allotted time people voted against the image, I would happily accept and move on, but I would prefer that people decide this matter for themselves which is how FP is supposed to work. I don’t think it would be fair if it get’s opposed because you actively campaign against it. So, thanks for providing alternate proposals, I personally don’t think they would pass FP. For the proposal at hand, I would encourage people to view the image and understand the issues as pointed out by Lycaon, but ultimately decide for themselves. Like it or not, it's a matter of taste. Cheers --Jnpet 07:06, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
result: 5 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Mywood 09:22, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]