Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Large Hadron Collider

Large Hadron Collider
Voting period ends on 31 May 2022  at 22:02:58 (UTC)
 * Reason:Quality image of the Large Hadron Collider, actually a section of it, because it is 17 miles long and in an underground tunnel. "The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is the world's largest and highest-energy particle collider. It lies in a tunnel 27 kilometres (17 mi) in circumference and as deep as 175 metres (574 ft) beneath the France–Switzerland border near Geneva." The LHC was built approximately 20 years ago, it's currently operational and is used for making discoveries in particle or subatomic physics.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Large Hadron Collider
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Sciences/Others
 * Creator:Maximilien Brice, CERN


 * Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 22:02, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Support TheFreeWorld (talk) 08:21, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 *  Weak support I certainly see the value, but I find the depth of field disappointing. Still, the limited access makes me lean support. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 09:11, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * The only way to get more DOF is focus stack (this is already at f/16 and a very high quality lens). Not sure focus stack should be the norm at FPC. And not saying DOF isn't a criterion. Bammesk (talk) 12:51, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * True, but the focus is also quite close, roughly around the ring at the back of the nearest blue section, so most of the image is quite a bit out of focus. Nearer the middle would have let it fall off more elegantly. (and it puts the visual emphasis on the least interesting component). Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.8% of all FPs 07:14, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * When the main subject doesn't fit in the DOF, the rule of thumb is to focus the lens for a sharp nearside, and let the far side drift out of focus (and into the bokeh). The opposite isn't the norm and the opposite generally looks terrible. Same with the mid-section being sharp and the nearside being out of focus. The camera used and the lens tells me the photographer is most likely a pro. IMO this is as good as it gets focus-wise, absent of focus stacking. Bammesk (talk) 02:56, 24 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Oppose This doesn't add much to the article. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:48, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Support UnpetitproleX (talk) 17:01, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Support Better lighting than the other, similar (but flash) photo. --Janke | Talk 15:23, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

--Armbrust The Homunculus 22:27, 31 May 2022 (UTC)