Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:French marigold Tagetes patula.jpg

French marigold

 * Reason:Good quality, EV. Slightly out of focus background is not distracting whilst adding EV due to the presence of the leaves
 * Articles this image appears in:Tagetes patula
 * Creator:Muhammad Mahdi Karim


 * Support as nominator --Muhammad (talk) 12:05, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Good use of depth of field.  Durova  280 17:01, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Support – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 05:05, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Support Noodle snacks (talk) 08:43, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose I think we're starting to see a dangerous precedent emerge on FPC concerning the illustration of plants - it seems to have become standard practice to simply get a close up image of the flower on a heavily blurred out background. Don't get me wrong, sometimes this is appropriate and useful for the article, but for many plants it's far from ideal. In this case I strongly think it would have been much better done with a wide angle lens and a lot more DOF. Eg this shot I took ages ago on my Kodak or something like File:Tagetes-1.jpg has far more EV because it shows much more of the plant and IMO doesn't suffer unduly with clutter. The "visible" leaves on this shot have no EV at all because they're blurred far too much. Aside from my concerns with EV I don't like the unnatural (as in man made) looking red object on the RHS and the composition feels a cut off - I'd have liked this better in portrait with more of the stem visible --Fir0002 12:44, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Alternative 1 uploaded. --Muhammad (talk) 15:19, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Precedents aside. Fir's linked examples to lead me to question the white balance on this. Noodle snacks (talk) 00:25, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose (precedents aside) After reading fur's comment which points out flaws which I did not immediately see (such as the red object on the RHS) I have to agree that the image could be better. Support Alt 1 if any.  « l | Promethean ™ | l »   (talk) 06:24, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

--Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 15:58, 30 July 2009 (UTC)