Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Perovskia atriplicifolia
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2015 at 17:21:15 (UTC)
- Reason
- The image is high-quality and resolution, and imparts significant EV.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Perovskia atriplicifolia
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants
- Creator
- RO
- Support as nominator – RO(talk) 17:21, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose Not sure if it is intentional, but approx 80% of the plant is so out of focus it's hard to see what it is... gazhiley 17:30, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
- Do you mean the background? It's a macro shot, so there is no way to get more than one portion in focus.RO(talk) 17:48, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
- no not at all... I mean the plant itself... View it full res and zoom in on the plant - it's mostly blurred...gazhiley 23:06, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
- Well, you can't get a macro shot where every part of the section is in perfect focus because the depth from the stem to the flower tips is enough that you have to chose one or the other, or a mix of both, which is what I've done. RO(talk) 23:11, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
- no not at all... I mean the plant itself... View it full res and zoom in on the plant - it's mostly blurred...gazhiley 23:06, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
- Do you mean the background? It's a macro shot, so there is no way to get more than one portion in focus.RO(talk) 17:48, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose - Agree with Gazhiley. F5.6 was too shallow a depth of field. You definitely need a smaller aperture for something like this. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:22, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
- How small? RO(talk) 23:24, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
- I assume you mean an f/8, but can you give me an example of such a shot, because I don't see anything smaller in the macro images on Wikipedia. The ones at Macro photography, such as File:Scatophaga stercoraria macro Luc Viatour.jpg are about the same as this shot. Can you find a better macro shot of a plant on Wikipedia, so I have something to go by? RO(talk) 00:07, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- Depends on your lens, but you may have to go to f/11 or even f/13 (assuming the lighting and wind allow it). Something like this, though not everything is in focus (the only thing that would allow you to get the whole thing in focus is focus stacking, and that's a pain to work with), doesn't have as many OOF blobs where the tips of the petals are. File:Centaurea jacea 01.JPG is another example where the focus is handled a bit better (that's f/11 as well). Another thing you could do is shoot from further away and then crop. Depth of field depends not only on aperture, but also on the distance from the lens to the subject. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 09:14, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose Certain quality problems and the question of contrast against the background. --Tremonist (talk) 13:35, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- Withdraw This should be withdrawn while I work out the kinks. Thanks for the input everybody. RO(talk) 22:00, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 09:53, 21 August 2015 (UTC)