Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/raspberries

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Raspberries

Looks delicious, and everything is the subject (by that I mean there is no b/g because the b/g is the subject as well!)
Alternative Versions: Image:Raspberries02.jpg, Image:Raspberries03.jpg

• Support Self Nom. --Fir0002 www 21:32, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support I almost didn't because some of the subject is cut off. :P -Ravedave 22:09, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support. Excellent. - JPM | 22:19, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support. Since we're making up things to whinge about, unlimited depth of field would be nice. ;) Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 22:49, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support. Any of the three is acceptable, although I prefer the third (Raspberries03.jpg). --Dante Alighieri | Talk 00:08, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support Yet another great picture. My stomach is now rumbling!--Ali K 00:25, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support I definitely like No. 5 the best. --liquidGhoul 02:30, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

I like the un-saturated one the best. They do look ripe (except for one at the top). The others look like they have been sugar-glazed. --liquidGhoul 05:03, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

• Comment - looks rather pink to me. Other than that, very nice. I like the color levels of Image:Raspberries03.jpg, but the composition of that one isn't as good as Image:Raspberries05.jpg. zafiroblue05 | Talk 03:27, 3 March 2006 (UTC) Support second image (first darkened version). I want to take a bite out of my screen. :) zafiroblue05 | Talk 06:25, 3 March 2006 (UTC) 06:24, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support Delicious--K.C. Tang 03:41, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose - I'd much prefer a darker version - these raspberries simply don't look ripe. It may be the lighting, but I wouldn't eat them. —Cuiviénen (Cuivië) 04:32, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
  • I was afraid people would think a dark version over saturated. But I've uploaded three edits for your consideration - I couldn't decide between them. --Fir0002 www 05:41, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
    • yes, i consider the new versions over-done.--K.C. Tang 07:48, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
    • I think the problem lies more with the lighting of the image and the raspberries shot than anything else. The darkening is an improvement, so I would support any of the darkened versions, but I still oppose original. —Cuiviénen (Cuivië) 18:16, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support second image (first darkened version) - delicious looking! --Janke | Talk 06:17, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support -- Excellent detail and sharpness. Prefer darker version. SteveHopson 06:40, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support -- I want to eat my screen Glaurung 07:01, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support yummy photo... --vineeth 08:07, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support Both the lighter and darker photos are so tasty looking! DaGizza^{Chat ©} 08:19, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support original, the darker ones look over-ripe. --Obli (Talk)^? 09:47, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support original, the others are much too saturated. chowells 12:10, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support Why not? If a picture is deftly aesthetic enough to incite the most subtle idiosyncrasies of the human taste buds, then... uh... never mind. I'm just really hungry. I support the original, but anything would do. The yellowish rasberry at the top left could be GIMPed out, but then the picture wouldn't be as "natural." Gracenotes ^T § 17:11, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose, looks like decent quality stock-photography, but is it really adding that much to the Raspberry article? I'd prefer a picture of them still hanging on the bush. Oh, checking the version history I can see that Fir just yesterday replaced such a pic with his. Sorry, but this looks a bit like self-promotion getting in the way of encyclopedic quality. Sigh, apparently I'm alone with this assessment. Time for an FPC-wikibreak. --Dschwen 21:48, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
  • We already have Image:Raspberries (Rubus Idaeus).jpg, which is the one Fir moved. This picture illustrates a completely different aspect of the subject. Are you saying that such a clear, high-res picture of picked berries adds nothing worthwhile to the article? That's a support by the way. Raven4x4x 00:01, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Sure, it does add to the article, and Fir's image is of far better quality, but I do agree with Dschwen: I think Fir should have added his pic to the gallery on the page, instead of moving the original one from the info-box to the gallery. Rasperries on the bush are more encyclopedic - the article is mainly about about the plant, not the foodstuff. Exactly where an image is on a page doesn't affect eligibility for FPC, so might someone (preferably Fir himself) do a switch? --Janke | Talk 21:16, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
      • OK I've done that, but you've gotta admit that the pic isn't that best on quality. However I see that it should really have the plant--Fir0002 www 21:36, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Support Fir0002 has delivered us many high-quality pictures and this one is cool too!! --Davpronk 00:39, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
• Commentwhile supporting Fir's pic, i guess one is justified to complain that Fir has replaced the original head pic, which is a featured pic in Common, with his own straight away ...--K.C. Tang 03:12, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support #5 (dark version) only. Neutrality^talk 03:42, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support dark version 212.244.146.101 09:29, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support Wow, we are getting some good images in recently. Well done Fir, my vote goes on the original pic, no darkened versions. —Vanderdecken∴∫ξφ 12:57, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support original. Uuhhh! Can I take some? - Darwinek 13:23, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support original. --Red Penguin 07:17, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support very nice article. Pegasus1138^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 08:47, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support - original only, I don't see any need for editing what is in the original a very good photo. Nice one again Fir. |→ Spaully°τ 14:13, 5 March 2006
• Support Darker Versions—Preferably The Second The original image does not seem ripe. Alvinrune ^TALK 03:10, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support Image:Raspberries05 edit02.jpg or the original. Staxringold 19:56, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support. All of the photographs are fantastic quality; any of the darkened versions are fine. Yum! — Webdinger ^{TALK | SZ} 05:34, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support TomStar81 19:10, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose Nothing particulary special Electricmoose- Electrifying ^talk 20:40, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Promoted IImage:Raspberries05.jpg Deciding which one to choose was hard. There were some comments exclusively in favor of the first and some exclusively for the darkened ones (the first dark one had a good deal of support), the original seems to be the common denominator and has the most support. BrokenSegue 14:50, 18 March 2006 (UTC)