Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Red Spider White Dots and Bars 2600px.jpg

EXAMPLE: Downsampled to show effective resolution

Info created, uploaded, and nominated by Ram-Man. -- Ram-Man 15:10, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Info Six-spotted Fishing Spider (Dolomedes triton).

Support I wish the resolution was higher, but this was as close as I could get, hence the crop. He was in the same pond as the lotus. -- Ram-Man 15:10, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice, but too small DOF. --norro 14:02, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I think the resolution and lighting and composition are great, but it seems to be not very sharp, although the DOF seems to put the spider in the centre of the focus range. Maybe it's a compression problem, maybe it's camera movement. Processing with the 'unsharp mask' filter in Gimp helps quite a bit. I won't vote against it as perhaps I'm being too picky. --Tony Wills 22:23, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I had to hold the camera arms outstretched to try to get as close as possible to the spider. As a result, there was some amount of camera shake, but it's not terrible. This was also before I had a macro lens, so I couldn't get the magnification that I wanted. Of course cropping is never as good as downsampling for the same end resolution. I'll see if I can perform some more processing to clean it up. -- Ram-Man 22:43, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 1 support, 1 neutral, 1 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 5th day) - Alvesgaspar 15:37, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Info I've done some post-processing on the original file. Sharpened and curves-adjusted to bump up the contrast.
Support -- Ram-Man 23:04, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - In the meantime, the Sun came out from behind the clouds... It is much better now and I like the composition, but the subject is a little blurry. - Alvesgaspar 16:48, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jina Lee 05:46, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose spider should've been a bit sharper (also the legs). Lycaon 07:14, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I know that it is unlikely that you'd change your vote, but I did upload a downsampled, 2MP, image anyway to show the effective resolution that this image actually has. I agree that it's right on the border of acceptable sharpness at 2MP, but when evaluated against the guidelines, I thought there was at least a chance of success. -- Ram-Man 12:57, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment I'm sorry, I'ld put it in my private collection any time (it is there as n° 55,853 actually). so I do like it, but for FP it needs that extra bit of quality (here sharpness). -- Lycaon 13:24, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - I understand. As I said, I didn't expect you to change your vote, but maybe someone else will care to vote based on the effective resolution showed by the downsampled example image. -- Ram-Man 13:45, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jon Harald Søby 20:45, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 07:57, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]