Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Diet Coke and Mentos eruption

Diet Coke and Mentos eruption
Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2013 at 21:53:09 (UTC)
 * Reason:This is a giant image with well-done lighting, composition, and color selection which clearly depicts exactly what the article is talking about and instantly places the subject into the viewer's visual context. It's easily of the same quality as other visual examples seen in, for example, undergraduate chemistry textbooks. The image is probably not perfect (I'm not qualified to decide, I just know that I think it looks good and I like it), and I'm sure the aesthetic savants here will find numerous minor flaws and details to criticize, but I believe it is still an excellent example of the high-quality volunteer work Wikipedia and its associated projects produce, most chiefly for its ability to clearly and immediately depict an otherwise minor or trivial topic.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Diet Coke and Mentos eruption
 * FP category for this image: Featured pictures/Sciences/Others
 * Creator:Michael Murphy


 * Support as nominator --Omg whatever (talk) 21:53, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Support I put an FP category in the nomination above; it has an animation of a water droplet and that's the closest representation I could find to help me locate the right cat. Judging from the second picture on the article, I'm guessing this was photographed as the foam was dying down? I was doing this with my little cousins last summer and the explosion was incredibly quick. I find the picture visually interesting and while the framing could have been a bit better, I think the photographer was undoubtedly unable to know which side the foam would spill on. So a centered frame is probably the best way to go. Almost too tight of a crop. But definitely a picture that will draw readers in to the article. – Kerαu noςco pia ◁ gala xies 22:20, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * It was almost certainly dying down. The other picture in the article seems to show the maximum height a bit better (although it was probably by no means scientific or accurate). dllu (t,c) 05:08, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Support per previous nom. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:31, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * What's slightly interesting are the two previous noms in which people state this photograph can be retaken and be much better. Six years later, no one has done so. – Kerαu noςco pia ◁ gala xies 23:46, 17 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment Since the "Diet Coke" on the label is a trademark, I've added the trademark template to the description page. I don't see anything copyrightable on the label, so that should not be an issue. Rreagan007 (talk) 23:57, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * If there were anything, I'm pretty sure it would be de minimis. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:58, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Support Nice pic and encouraged me to read the wikipedia article.Godhulii 1985 (talk) 19:16, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Support Despite the minor flaws (oversaturation, poor sharpness, blown highlights, distracting stained cloth in the background), it's a well-executed shot overall. Few would risk damaging expensive cameras with something like this; and it probably took more than one try to get right. By the way I noticed, in savant fashion, that the edit done by Fourthords on 7 January 2009 was lossy. Maybe it should be redone in a lossless way. dllu (t,c) 05:08, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Support EV is excellent and more than makes up for minor imperfections. -- WingtipvorteX  PTT   ∅  16:19, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Support I tried to make a photo very similar to this a few years ago. Unfortunately, all of the mentos packets that I could get my hands on were glazed in some way, and whilst there was a reaction, it was not of the usual violence level, probably due to reduced surface area. JJ Harrison (talk) 10:03, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

--Armbrust The Homunculus 21:56, 26 June 2013 (UTC)