Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Dahlia Graceland

Dahlia Graceland

 * Reason:The image maches most of the FP criteria and it is very beautiful flower.
 * Articles this image appears in:Dahlia
 * Creator:Lestat

This pic is only used in a gallery, which doesn't really qualify as "being in an article". Please fix. MER-C 05:17, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Support as nominator --Lestath (talk) 17:51, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Support - I think there's a bit too much space of just leaves... maybe a crop? (Giligone (talk) 20:17, 8 September 2008 (UTC))
 * Support I think the leaves are fine Intothewoods29 (talk) 20:22, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose The DOF is much too big, so the background is very distracting. Additionally at full resolution the technical quality is rather poor, e.g. it's not very sharp. All in all a nice shot, but not an FP. —αἰτίας •'discussion'• 00:39, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It's a 10 megapixel image. It's perfectly sharp at any reasonable viewing resolution. Kaldari (talk) 15:16, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Support I disagree with aitias. DOF is certainly not too big, since some of the leaves are already slightly blurred (OOF). And it's certainly sharp enough. Just print this one and a < 2mpix FP at a same size and compare... Blieusong (talk) 18:14, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose Shows less of the plant then the current taxobox picture: stem and lower leaves are missing. Narayanese (talk) 21:18, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Support IMO a picture does not need to show the whole organism to have EV. Muhammad (talk) 13:05, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Support High detail. &mdash; BRIAN 0918 &bull; 2008-09-12 14:19Z
 * Fixed. --Lestath (talk) 13:30, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Support A nice image, but I do agree with some of Aitias' points. (Distracting background)  Spencer T♦C 00:43, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Support Lots of detail etc but a distracting background. Noodle snacks (talk) 02:26, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Plenty of technical virtue, but with flower shots, background is key to creating something better than ordinary.  It's just too busy.--ragesoss (talk) 06:21, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose The too-sharp background is indeed a problem. --Janke | Talk 08:00, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Beautiful picture, very clear, wonderful color. Depth of field makes the flower stand out nicely. tscolin (talk) 18:37, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The above user has made a total of 4 edits, 3 to this page.  Spencer T♦C 19:14, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

MER-C 10:15, 2 October 2008 (UTC)