Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Fallen bricks.jpg

File:Fallen bricks.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2018 at 03:23:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
Info All by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 03:23, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 03:23, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Something different, but quite cool with the various lines and angles. For a shot like this to be successful, though, the technical quality has to be really high. I think it is.--Peulle (talk) 08:05, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Peulle --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:18, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:44, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- KTC (talk) 23:18, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:57, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose They're falling, very good. So we see the right side, tidy, the middle collapsing, but what happens on the left is missing. The framing seems hazardous, like random. In particular the dark hole on the bottom left should be highlighted in the composition with a better integration. The first row of bricks is weak. Finally the whole is too ordinary, quite boring and not better than a QI -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:10, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment LOL! I read someone not too long ago about revenge votes being easy to spot... Just sayin' --Tomascastelazo (talk) 19:48, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tomascastelazo wrote a few days ago "I rarely oppose photographs here, and when I do, I expose the reason for my oppose. My ratio support vs oppose must be 100-1, and that is easy to verify." (here). Not coherent at all with the facts, which are indeed very easy to verify yes, just checking the archives. At least 3 oppose on my own candidatures during this current month for example. On the contrary, I use to oppose a lot, on many different candidatures, and this is verifiable too. Fortunately most of the nominators here understand and accept divergent opinions, without getting upset and immediately talking about "revenge". That's absolutely ridiculous, especially when we check that the single person who has just opposed right now to my last nomination here, after this subjective review is precisely Tomascastelazo again with a very inspired comment. Completely absurd. So stick to the fact, accept contradiction, stay logic, and don't make false accusation. Greetings -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:19, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Well, I don´t know where you get your statistics or perhaps you are your own victim of inductive thinking... Check my entire oppose history... As far as my yes, subjective evaluation, because all of them are, stands about your photograph. Unsharp, out of scale, all in one and poorly composed. I understand that you may like it, but between you liking it and it being a great photograph, there is a biiiiiiiiig space. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 15:52, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the big space :

Tomascastelazo's 10 last nominations : 30% success ( 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10)

Basile Morin's 10 last nominations : 90% success ( 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10)

Tomascastelazo's 10 last votes : 90% matching the consensus, with exclusively supports ( S, S, S, S, S, S, S, S, S, S)

Basile Morin's 10 last votes : 100% matching the consensus, with an alternation of oppose & supports ( S, S, S, O, S, S, O, O, O, O)

Now we have to stick to the subject. The problem of this picture is not that I'm the only one to oppose, as it already happened previously with a more understanding nominator (1). Seriously the problem is this crop. We can see the trouble from the file page history. I'm not inventing anything : clue of the weakness, the picture was already cropped twice from its original size before being nominated. On this first version, the issue mentioned in my review above is very much visible. The composition is totally unbalanced, with the left part hidden, like missing. Not an elegant image, with the cut brick near the darkest hole on the bottom left. I respect every divergent opinion here, just sorry, that's my feeling and I share it. The picture is sharp, the subject is too ordinary. In the guidelines on the top of this page, we can read "A bad picture of a very difficult subject is a better picture than a good picture of an ordinary subject". That's the case currently. Bricks, nothing else. No lizard, no vegetation, no fancy, just a red wall. Abstract nominations are welcome in FPC, but they have to be exceptional. Is this texture extraordinary ? The left part missing sounds like a story which is not terminated. Trying to cut the right part to hide a problem on the left didn't work well. Now the strange ratio L/W = 1,3658 is a bit awkward. Other people may agree with this choice, it happens sometimes, but personally I don't follow here the consensus. This difference was expressed with frankness. Now anyone is free to take a step back to improve, or not. Good luck -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:36, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment OMG! Don´t you have anything better to do? So, what do the statistics as you present them mean? That you get more pics approved as FP? So, what does that mean? That you approve and oppose with a higher degree of accuracy? So? Again, what does that mean? Perhaps you could use your visionary ability to buy Lotto instead!!!! Seriously, what the heck do those number mean? Ah, and BTW, did any of your works of art make it to the finalists in POTY? Just askin´!

Now, as you say, with the subject... So you don´t like it. Oppose it, end of discussion. Your diatribe is puerile and plain stupid on many fronts. Nowhere will you find that one is obligated to use the full image area of a photograph, nowhere. Cropping is a choice and a very legitimate tool of every photographer and graphic designer... As for the rest, go with God my dear child, may he enlighten you and shine the path to better things to do, like taking pictures... real photographs... --Tomascastelazo (talk) 23:54, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Oppose it, end of discussion" -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:02, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support It's different and I like it. Daniel Case (talk) 06:48, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:15, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- P999 (talk) 21:00, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 15:18, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Ok my kind of photo, but it doesn't make me go "Yay!". Crop could have been better plus a bit more bite in the contrast and colors. Right now it looks tame. --Cart (talk) 22:45, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - Interesting, aesthetic, but at the same time confusing and chaotic. Not exactly my cup of tea but it is aesthetic though... :) ― Gerifalte _Del Sabana 03:49, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:49, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile Morin. --MB-one (talk) 16:35, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 14:56, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not impressed, I may have been if part of the image (bottom/right) was perfectly symmetrical, but that's not the case and all I see is a quality image of fallen bricks. --Trougnouf (talk) 06:17, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 3 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /--Basile Morin (talk) 07:01, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects