Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Arilus cristatus
Arilus cristatus edit
- Reason
- High res, good DOF, good EV, decent lighting and composition. This is a hand-masked focus stack of two images. The alternate is a non focus-stacked image (I had to sacrifice composition to get it all in the focus plane though).
- Articles this image appears in
- Wheel bug
- Creator
- Kaldari
- Support as nominator --Kaldari (talk) 03:33, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose Harsh lighting on both. Taking ISO upto 800 is usually good if you dont have a complex flash setup. --Muhammad(talk) 12:42, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- The first picture is only natural light. Probably should have used a flash to offset the direct sunlight, but I have a harder time stacking images with flash (the lighting never seems to be exactly the same). The second image used a flash which helped some with the lighting, but the ivy leaves were just too glossy I'm afraid. Kaldari (talk) 15:47, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- It's never a good idea to shoot in direct sunlight without flash. You can manually adjust the lighting in PS. Done it numerous times. --Muhammad(talk) 19:08, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- Personally I'd shade it, then do what I wanted with the lighting. Some insects dislike that though. Noodle snacks (talk) 07:06, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
- It's never a good idea to shoot in direct sunlight without flash. You can manually adjust the lighting in PS. Done it numerous times. --Muhammad(talk) 19:08, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- The first picture is only natural light. Probably should have used a flash to offset the direct sunlight, but I have a harder time stacking images with flash (the lighting never seems to be exactly the same). The second image used a flash which helped some with the lighting, but the ivy leaves were just too glossy I'm afraid. Kaldari (talk) 15:47, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose Alt1 I agree with the light. Alt1 is terrible in that respect. Neutral on original. Nezzadar 18:25, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- Support original, Weak support for Alt (if needed). Our standards for insect pictures are going ever upwards, and that's a good thing. Nevertheless, I think that the original here is a featured picture, in both encyclopedic value and in quality. The lighting is a little harsh, but nevertheless the insect is still extremely clear. The encyclopedic value is undeniable. Mostlyharmless (talk) 07:55, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Not promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 05:43, 15 October 2009 (UTC)