Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Fresnel lens
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2012 at 17:50:10 (UTC)
- Reason
- High quality, good EV
- Articles in which this image appears
- Fresnel lens
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Engineering and technology/Others
- Creator
- Frank Schulenburg
- Support as nominator --Tomer T (talk) 17:50, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
- Comment: Is that a railing at the bottom of the image? SpencerT♦C 05:58, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
- Support So use dry technical terms.... That is so cool! Also, a dramatic and interesting illustration of the article with historical significance. North8000 (talk) 01:10, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
- Comment I think the picture in the gallery has a better view; showing the entire subject. JKadavoor Jee 06:50, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
- This one also shows the entire subject... And it has a far better lighting. Tomer T (talk) 10:34, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
- But the bottom (railing?) is a bit disturbing to me. JKadavoor Jee 13:45, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
- This one also shows the entire subject... And it has a far better lighting. Tomer T (talk) 10:34, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
- Support I like the horizontal angle of this version better. --Pine✉ 23:04, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
- Support Mediran talk|contribs 10:43, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
- Weak support I do like the lighting and angle of this image better than the other picture of the same lens in the gallery; however, like JKadavoor, the railing is a little distracting to me and I think it would be a little better if it were cropped out. Hersfold non-admin(t/a/c) 19:35, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
- comment there are a lot of these things in museums. Going after the one in the london science museum with a tilt shift lens might produce a better result.©Geni 09:13, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose The subject is interesting and useful, and the image is technically high quality, but the composition and lighting is low quality. -Fjozk (talk) 16:47, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose per reasons above, I think we can do better. — raekyt 16:57, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose. This is a worthwhile picture as far as illustrating the subject is concerned, but for me it has insufficient artistic quality to raise it to "featured picture" status. 86.160.84.230 (talk) 02:18, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 23:57, 1 November 2012 (UTC)