Wikimedia Commons

Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Lens flare and crepuscula rays.jpg

< Commons:Featured picture candidates

Image:Lens flare and crepuscula rays.jpg, not featured edit

 

  •   Info created , uploaded and nominated by Mbz1 -- Mbz1 (talk) 05:01, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Info This image is a very good illustration of how not to take images. The subject of the image is lens flare, but this partical flare is interesting. It shows a good refraction of the real sun from my camera's lens, and because the sun was miraged and not round it is easy to see at the image that refracted sun is upside down. IMO it is an interesting and new subject for FPC.--Mbz1 (talk) 05:01, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support -- Mbz1 (talk) 05:01, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support you have a flare for photography. :-) (sorry, couldn't resist) -- Korax1214 (talk) 07:27, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose Interesting and new, all right, but only the wow of another sunset. So though valuable, not suitable for FP. Lycaon (talk) 15:41, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    If I wanted to repeat this shot, and I'm not talking about clouds, about rays, about mirage, but just repeat this second sun lens flare, I would not have been able to do it. I often take images of the sun and I often get flare, but it was the only time I got such an accurate inverted second sun. IMO, Hans, you contradict yourself. On one hand you say: "Interesting and new, all right" and on the other hand you say: "only the wow of another sunset". These two statements are just the opposites IMO. Another sunset image cannot be new.No, this image is not about sunset at all. Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:58, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, IMO, is the first impression you get when you look at an image (in casu in FP size on the front page). On you picture, one sees a sunset, nothing more. After reading an extensive caption and looking at the real size picture, one may appreciate the value of such an image, but that is no longer wow... Lycaon (talk) 17:07, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Come on, Hans, it is a strech! IMO one should not read the "extensive caption" to notice the second sun at the very first look at the image because it is cleary seen even in a thumnail and it is what makes the image WOW in my opinion. Still your latest statement did not explain why you called "another sunset" image "interesting", "new", "valuable" even after reading the "extensive caption".--Mbz1 (talk) 17:32, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm having fun with the nomination.I'll tell you why. Could you imagine, what would have happened, if I nominated the image as an image of a sunset and/or crepuscular rays? By now I would have got quite of few opposes because of "the second sun", but now the reviewers telling me that my beautiful "second sun" is hardly noticeable! Next time I'll nominate an image to show what the noise is, and I am sure it will get opposed because the noise is "hardly noticeable". It's going to be fun :-). There's no offence at all. Thank you for you vote,Norro.--Mbz1 (talk) 19:17, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your assessment of the nomination is wrong. The image is much mote than just technically insufficient image. It is an interesting and fine example of a rather serious optic matter , which is studied even by NASA --Mbz1 (talk) 17:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • [...] It is an interesting and fine example of a rather serious optic. Of course, and that makes it a very valuable picture, but not a featured one IMHO. --LC-de (talk) 11:21, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose It's weird to me that an image with technical defects, flare in this case, be a FP (no mather how enigmatic this type of flare is, it is still a picture defect because the second sun is not something you want on the final picture). This is clearly a Valued Image case IMO (best image of something without being technically perfect). --S23678 (talk) 17:39, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
result: withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 14:53, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Image:Lens_flare_and_crepuscula_rays.jpg&oldid=12893238"