Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bubble brokenchopstick

 
A Soap Bubble
Reason
Excellent Image, great quality. It's very colourful and pleasing to the eye. Shows a bubble in a very creative way while keeping its excellent quality.I think this is one of Wikipedia's greatest pictures.
Articles this image appears in
Soap bubble
Creator
brokenchopstick, uploader is Interiot.
After seeing the numerous pics in soap bubble superior to this one, I've increased my opposition. --TotoBaggins 20:30, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Wow! There are a lot of awesome images in the article soap bubble! --Gabycs 20:14, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as per Toto. The background is distracting. - Mgm|(talk) 10:32, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as it's quite spectacular. Theonlyedge 12:42, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as per Toto. The red splodge especially is distracting in the background. I doubt you could avoid reflections on the bubble altogether, but it should be possible to have something more appealing in the reflection. --jjron 14:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, background is too distracting. --Phoenix 21:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This photo is just an amazing piece of photography. The light and centering is too brilliant to be opposed to any small colours in the background. Producing a picture of the object this small and fragile with a camera is a great feat indeed. Try taking a picture of a small bubble like this with the same amount of clarity at home. Just by itself, this simple but spectacular image should be pointed out for it's perfections, not it's flaws. May I also point out: BUBBLES ARE SHINY. THEY HAVE REFLECTIONS. some enraged farm animal (UTC)
  • Weak Support - It is a nice picture but that red spot is annoying... Booksworm Talk to me! 14:58, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very strong OpposeThere's nothing spectacular in that picture. Photographing soap bubbles like that is very easy. There are much better pictures in the same article-

Mbz1 | Talk

Not promoted MER-C 06:41, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]