Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/EtaCarinae.jpg

Eta Carinae as pictured by hubble

 * Reason:This is a high resolution image of one of the most massive star. Has been a featured picture at Spanish Wikipedia.
 * Articles this image appears in:Eta Carinae,Hypernova, Carina Nebula, Homunculus Nebula, Gamma ray burst progenitors
 * Creator:Jon Morse (University of Colorado) and NASA Hubble Space Telescope image, published by STScI.


 * Support as nominator Sumanch (talk) 19:25, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Far too much HDR, what do you mean it can't be reshot ;-p No seriously, its excellent, obviously. Mfield (talk) 19:55, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Pretty soft, can we get someone with decent equipment to reshoot?? ;-) -Fcb981 (talk:contribs) 20:20, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Support —αἰτίας •'discussion'• 22:59, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Lipton sale (talk) 02:17, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Support The quality is excellent. Capital photographer (talk) 03:05, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Support although I want to note that there is already a featured picture of this star. Spikebrennan (talk) 14:16, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually that image is not a picture of Eta Carinae. It is an image of the Carina Nebula, NGC 3372, where Eta Carinae resides. A lot of people make the mistake of calling it "Eta Carinae Nebula". This image should clear this popular error.Sumanch (talk) 19:58, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I think we're actually agreeing with each other. I was unclear in my earlier comment-- I meant to say that we already have a featured picutre where this star can be seen.  (It's a spectacular object, and certainly worthy of being featured more than once).  Spikebrennan (talk) 12:48, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with you. But the difference between these images is same as the difference between this image and this.Sumanch (talk) 17:26, 1 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Support Excellent quality and exceptional contentJ.T Pearson (talk) 15:06, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Support. Clearly distorted. Needs restitching to correct this. Also too warm, needs colour correction. ;-) Diliff  | (Talk)   (Contribs) 16:32, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Support. Blown highlights on the stars! Nautica Shad e  s  22:01, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Support wonderful. The freddinator (talk) 22:08, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Simply perfect. --Dcelasun (talk) 11:31, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Support. Wow. However, can we remove 'stunning' from the caption? J Milburn (talk) 19:39, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
 * It is no longer stunning.:) Sumanch (talk) 22:46, 29 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Support if i can't call it stunning then i shall have to call it magnificent. as for the other featured picture mentioned previously, it looks a bit, dare i say, messy in comparison to this picture. this is certainly the better of the two pictures by a long way. Pm504 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 01:26, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment is this an artists conception? the nasa website shows a different image Thisglad (talk) 00:35, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * This image is not an artist's conception. The NASA image was cropped from this original to emphasize Eta Carinae and its ejecta, the Homunculus Nebula, in visible spectrum. The red aura is a near IR image of the surrounding mater interacting with the radiation from Eta Carinae.Sumanch (talk) 17:10, 1 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Massive Support. Absolutely beautiful!   Spinach Dip  02:02, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Not only is this photo informative, it is just plain cool. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerrittk (talk • contribs) 20:35, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Great picture! Spencer  T♦C 19:16, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

MER-C 09:05, 4 May 2008 (UTC)