Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Eight windows wrapped in plastic.jpg

File:Eight windows wrapped in plastic.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2016 at 18:54:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
Info All by me -- w.carter-Talk 18:54, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- w.carter-Talk 18:54, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I like this photo. It's not an extremely complicated motif, but it is fun to look at and strikes me as having some of the experimental spirit of early periods of photography, exploring the power of the medium to observe objects and the way light shines through them. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:46, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support great, thanks! Absolutely per Ikan --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:49, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support The brightness at top left is my one small quibble, but I like this overall. A creative idea that works 95% for me. INeverCry 06:11, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! :) I totally understand your point since I also fought with the decision on whether I should keep the very bright left or tone it down or crop it out. In the end I decided to keep it since the frames form a sort of "color sample gradient" and those usually go from absolute white to the darkest of the color. w.carter-Talk 07:24, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support We might be looking at the next MS Windows default wallpaper ;) - Benh (talk) 09:10, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

LOL!!! It would be appropriate for Windows 8... w.carter-Talk 09:27, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 12:33, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
OpposeThe wrapping spoils it for me. If there were just 8 windows getting greener without any distracting element, that would be nicer. Less is more here. --Kreuz schnabel 13:31, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I was to support with enthousiasm, but I notice that the extreme left vertical up line is overexposed or blown up. No details are visible. Maybe a crop would help ? Anyway, something "fresh" here !--Jebulon (talk) 17:54, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see from my comment above to INC, I have been debating this thing with myself. I did a version (not uploaded) with that toned down where details are visible. Still not 100% sure what to do... w.carter-Talk 18:49, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Dilly-dallying done. I made a very bold move, given the discussion going on at Commons talk:Featured picture candidates about altering a pic during nomination. Hope this is still ok, or should I 'ping' everybody? The little troublesome white part is now toned down just enough so that details begin to show, at least at full size. Thank you Jebulon for kicking my butt sufficiently to make this alteration. :) w.carter-Talk 19:46, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - That's a very subtle difference to my eyes. It couldn't hurt to ping, of course, but I wonder whether it would make the difference between a supporting and an opposing vote for anyone. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:08, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support I feel a bit stupid: I did not read the discussion with INC before writing my own comment...But well, I see that we were at least three (including you), with the same idea, so we are not wrong ! About the change during the nomination: I agree with Ikan Kekek. A) the change is minor, B) it results of a debate, C) it is an obvious improvement, D) and I thik it would/should not change any vote. All is correct for me. Let's feel a real and free minded enthousiasm for this picture. I think the wrapping adds in composition, by the way !--Jebulon (talk) 21:22, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Je vous embrasse, monsieur! I also think the wrapping adds to it, sort of like "speed-blur" on an otherwise rather large and just green area as the windows swoosh through space. w.carter-Talk 21:30, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Ali Zifan 21:24, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely textures and shades. Glad to see this very different image here ... I had intended to be the one to promote it to QI but was prevented from doing so by an edit conflict. At that time I suspected we'd see more of it ... obviously I was right. Daniel Case (talk) 21:56, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good idea --Llez (talk) 11:22, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support − Meiræ 14:39, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Mö1997 (Questions ?!?!) 20:25, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Question - The question in this case is why you oppose. A reason is generally given. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:18, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I do not see here anything so exceptional for PF nomination. --Karelj (talk) 09:49, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:21, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects