Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Lamadi woman
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 May 2011 at 18:28:04 (UTC)
- Reason
- Lamadi is a tribe in India. The picture showcases the attire and the colours of India.
- Articles in which this image appears
- http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Banjara
- FP category for this image
- (http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_pictures#Culture.2C_entertainment.2C_and_lifestyle)
- Creator
- User:Hariya1234
- Support as nominator --Hariya1234 (talk) 18:28, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
- Comment: At the very least, the date should be removed. J Milburn (talk) 20:18, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose -- Very poor lighting, with harsh shadows and little detail in the face. The date should indeed be removed. Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:39, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose - Don't think the lighting is quite as poor as Alvesgasper does, but it's still not top. Also, the date, as has been said. Anoldtreeok (talk) 04:22, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
- Comment -- Cropped the image and added some light to it. Hariya1234 (talk) 04:29, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
- Strong support. The lighting is fantastic - it fits the subject perfectly. As the date's gone, there's nothing wrong with it now. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 09:16, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
- Strong support -- Background and subject are set out excellently combined with the lighting make the picture lively. Gnbonline (talk) 19:29, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, but to create an account just to support this picture looks like cheating to me. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:59, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
- Come now, that's hardly welcoming. The votes of anonymous users are often ignored, which is already bitey enough, but that means that, should someone want to take page, they should create an account. The weighting of this vote, unless you have evidence of anything untoward, should really be decided by the closer. J Milburn (talk) 21:20, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
- Must say this, I think this vote should be ignored. It's my friend.
- Come now, that's hardly welcoming. The votes of anonymous users are often ignored, which is already bitey enough, but that means that, should someone want to take page, they should create an account. The weighting of this vote, unless you have evidence of anything untoward, should really be decided by the closer. J Milburn (talk) 21:20, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, but to create an account just to support this picture looks like cheating to me. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:59, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
Hariya1234 (talk) 02:00, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
- Comment. I can see why others dislike the heavy shadows. Would it not be possible to lift these slightly in post-processing? I've made a very quick attempt at doing doing so in edit one -- what do people think? NotFromUtrecht (talk) 19:40, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, it is much better. But the overall quality is way below the FP standards, in my opinion. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:59, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
- Quality as in the resolution or the picture itself? Hariya1234 (talk) 02:00, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
- Not the resolution but, in my opinion, the framing and the background (besides the harsh lighting). On the other hand there is little expression in this face. Alvesgaspar (talk) 07:45, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
- Quality as in the resolution or the picture itself? Hariya1234 (talk) 02:00, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, it is much better. But the overall quality is way below the FP standards, in my opinion. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:59, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
- Support either – the heavy shadows on the face are not ideal (perhaps use a bit of fill flash next time?), but the portrait has good EV and I actually quite like the rather plain composition. NotFromUtrecht (talk) 12:14, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Support alt only per NotFromUtrech turn your flash on at -2 stops or so. JJ Harrison (talk) 23:01, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Comment[[JJHarrison, not sure what you mean by using flash at -2 stops. As in, probably by -2 stops you mean the exposure value, you mean to say that meter the face to -2 stops and then use flash? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hariya1234 (talk • contribs) 19:04, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
- Meter the face as usual. Your camera can also adjust how bright the flash is ("flash exposure compensation") relative to the scene. For fill flash you don't want it as bright, so set it to -2 stops or so. JJ Harrison (talk) 23:41, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
- Oh alright, Thanks man, flash compensation was something that I've not used often. Hariya1234 (talk) 06:10, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
- I'd suggest using it almost always whilst out in the sun. JJ Harrison (talk) 06:40, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- Oh alright, Thanks man, flash compensation was something that I've not used often. Hariya1234 (talk) 06:10, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
- Meter the face as usual. Your camera can also adjust how bright the flash is ("flash exposure compensation") relative to the scene. For fill flash you don't want it as bright, so set it to -2 stops or so. JJ Harrison (talk) 23:41, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 08:17, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- Ignoring Gnbonline's support per Hariya's comment. Makeemlighter (talk) 08:17, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- Unless you're regarding Gnbonline as a meatpuppet the vote should probably be counted. With due respect Hariya hasn't really been a regular here either so isn't particularly aware of the processes, and plenty of other people vote on their 'friends' images. Having said which, this also raises the issue that FPC has again become simply a 'vote count'. --jjron (talk) 08:08, 4 June 2011 (UTC)