Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Fly on petal.JPG

File:Fly on petal.JPG, not featured

Voting period ends on 3 May 2009 at 11:00:46

Info created,uploaded and nominated by Moise Nicu -- Moise Nicu (talk) 11:00, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Moise Nicu (talk) 11:00, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Cute but there are 2 many things which aren't optimal. Lighting, composition - crop, noise .. btw. welcome to COM:FPC ! -Richard Bartz (talk) 12:14, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thanks:-). Also, about the noise... Can someone give me some advice on it? Because I took the picture with ISO64 and as far as I know it should not be noisy. Am I doing something wrong or is it just the camera?

I don't use a Nikon camera. I think it's because of a feature similar to Canon's tonal value priority which automatically brightens dark areas - which causes color noise throught excessive overdrive of the sensor - or - 2 much sharpening value in the parameters. --Richard Bartz (talk) 13:21, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment you will find it very difficult to get good 'extreme' macro shots with this type of camera. Flowers, lizards, butterflies etc should be OK if you can keep the noise levels down. --ianaré (talk) 18:06, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral The fly is reasonably sharp, except for the wing and further parts of the body which are almost out of sight anyway. The texture of the petal is visible. The pattern of petals makes a nice idea. The weakness of composition is in too much background in the top half of the picture. I suggest a crop so that this is reduced, placing the eye of the fly at "rule of thirds" location towards the top left-hand corner. We have no reference by which to assess the petal colour, so must assume that it is naturally this vivid yellow. The other weakness is the harsh metallic sparkle on some bits of the fly, especially the magenta and cyan blobs on the top between the wings. It seems that, with the equipment you have (rather than professional kit) you have done fairly well before the fly flew away. But it is not quite up to the standard being aimed at for a relatively common-place subject. Use the experience on FPC lists to give guidance for the future. That is what I try to do, thinking more critically about how to get round the limitations of my camera. -- Robert of Ramsor (talk) 00:26, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Maedin\^talk 11:03, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]