Support high quality, nice colours, good composition and something different to the thousands of "just the flower centered" pictures--Simonizer15:12, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support This picture was shot at f/2.8 to blur the background. I have this at other apertures in case it's required, but I prefer this one. The plant is a meter or so tall. -- Ram-Man15:23, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - composition too. The image should have been better in landscape format, putting flowers within the middle vertical third. We need the missing top, but the bottom, while still necessary to the image, is boring ; the only to present the subject with correct composition would have been to use a landscape format, with a shot probably slightly from above, to reduce the height of the feets. It would have also given more focus and sharp details to the small flowers. Verdy p19:52, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
1) I have a landscape version, but the background is more distracting. 2) Vertical framing highlights the tall plants. In landscape, fewer pixels would be dedicated to the flowers since the view would be wider, lowering their sharpness. Vertical is better suited to a taxobox. 3) Instead of taking it straight on, a higher angle would introduce perspective distortion, decreasing its value. 4) A smaller aperture increases flower sharpness at the expense of background blur, as mentioned above. 5) What top is missing? -- Ram-Man20:20, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]