Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Twin lantana

Twin lantana

I nominate this picture for its composition and delicacy of colouring. Aditional encyclopedic interest is given by the presence of an unexpected guest: a crab spider. In full resolution sharpness is on the soft size due to limited depth-of-field and hemispherical shape of flowers. Image created by Joaquim Alves Gaspar

Nominate and support. - Alvesgaspar 23:31, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support SOADLuver 00:38, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak oppose~~. Somewhat unsharp in full size. Can anyone fix that without excessive artifacts? Will support a good edit. --Janke | Talk 07:03, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Info ~~I won't try to do it myself.~~ The background already has some noise and I'm not a specialist in editing - Alvesgaspar 09:16, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Weak support edit 1. This time, smaller is better... ;-) Slightly blown highlights prevent full support. --Janke | Talk 08:11, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not sharp enough for FP (either edit) - Adrian Pingstone 15:01, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. It's a shame, but I can see some compression artefacts when viewed at full size. Submitting a smaller version could address that problem (this is how twisted FPC can be, I guess - submitting a smaller image just to fix artefacts!) - Samsara (talk · contribs) 17:03, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Info – Yes, it is a shame... The second version was slightly edited and downsized. - Alvesgaspar 18:14, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I think general policy is to upload edits on Commons, by the way. NauticaShad e s
Oppose. Blurry with blown highlights. --Tewy 22:59, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose original, weak support edit 1 - OK, it's not perfect, but it's damned near impossible to reproduce and undoubtedly a pretty photo. Just good enough in my opinion. -- CountdownCrispy ^{( ?} 23:02, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment One side of me say: "awww... isn't that pretty." While the other, more influencial, side says: "urgh... what a horrible plant, I hate lantana". --liquidGhoul 14:53, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Just think that we have to know the face of the enemy, however charming it is, so we can fight it better... - Alvesgaspar 15:21, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Original, Weak Support Edit 1. Per Countdown Crispy. NauticaShad e s 21:06, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I really thought I was getting better at reading whether or not photos were technically well done--apparently not. Can someone make a version for me that points out all of the technical problems? The (very minimal) blow out isn't as bad as Image:Habanero.jpg is it? I do realized that FP plants are a really good bunch... but, I want to be shown why. On commons FPC I often took the harsher voting side with User:Moondigger and I usually saw the technical problems he talked about. If someone wants to help me see... that'd be nice. gren グレン 22:30, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Edit 1. Good enough for me, it's beauty outweighs any minor flaws. --jjron 11:01, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support. As per Countdown Crispy - jlao ⁰ ⁴ 02:45, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support edit 1 SOADLuver 19:01, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

~~Not promoted 3/5.5~~ --NauticaShad e s 17:54, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Decision overturned. Promoted Image:Twin_lantana_camara_edit.jpg NauticaShad e s 14:20, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]