Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Lighter Ignition

Lighter ignition

 * Reason:We need more images of something other than nature or late 19th century art. Besides encyclopedic value I think it's pretty, especially streaks left by the sparks. FFfiire!
 * Articles in which this image appears:Lighter
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Sciences/Others
 * Creator:Ben_pcc


 * Support as nominator --Ben pcc (talk) 17:10, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Support --The High Fin Sperm Whale 17:15, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Nice caption, but you can see neither the flint nor the textured metal drum. Overall the picture is a bit too dark, motion blurred and gimmicky overall to be encyclopedically usefull. Looks cool though. I must have a couple of old shots like this somewhere burried on my HD too. --Dschwen 17:46, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose Due to light issues - as per Dschwen - you cannot see two of the main parts talked about in the caption... I do like the spark streaks though... Gazhiley (talk) 07:40, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * So you think that with more light the flint would be visible? Considering that it's covered in metal I'm pretty sure it wouldn't. And if I remove the metal, it's the source of spark so unless the photo is taken not when sparking you won't see much.
 * I redid this with an out of focus light color bath towel as background and really didn't like it. I was about to upload as alternate but when comparing to what's here now it's obviously poorer looking. I also had it clamped in a vise to lessen motion blur but that worsened the gimmicky-ness, this photo is more natural, only a cigarette is missing. Not that I smoke.
 * My main issue with my photo, and I'm surprised this didn't come up in response #1, is the overexposure. I tried many ways to reduce (my lens goes down to f/57 and stays pretty sharp :->) it but they all looked terrible. I haven't tried tone mapping though. -Ben pcc (talk) 04:07, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * As per Noodle below I still stand by my point - the lighther is so dark you cannot see the parts you refer to... It's a good picture, especially with the sparks - but not EV for the process you refer to... Gazhiley (talk) 10:56, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Weak support: I hear what is being said above, but, looking at it, I'm learning something. J Milburn (talk) 11:03, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe, but are you learning it from the picture or article? Gazhiley (talk) 11:16, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The picture. I've used lighters plenty of times, but I still went "wow, I didn't realise..." when I saw the picture. J Milburn (talk) 22:48, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It does look pretty cool... Benjamint 04:22, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Oppose use some flash to make the lighter visable. See http://www.flickr.com/photos/liberato/2521884271/in/faves-26601890@N06/ for the type of result you might expect. Noodle snacks (talk) 07:13, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, ok, here's an alternate. I try to never use flash unless needed absolutely. In this photo it's clamped on a vise, and though the aperture is way, way shut you can see the business end of the lighter clearly. The textured metal drum kind of shows but like I said I don't think I can get flint in... -Ben pcc (talk) 16:41, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * You shouldn't be trying to not use flash unless its needed absolutely. Throw a home made softbox (cardboard+tracing paper) on it and it will look fine in this situation. More generally, do some reading about lighting. this is a half decent start for the use of flash. Noodle snacks (talk) 23:29, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I know about and have used paper tricks, and have access to a ring light. I prefer natural light though. It worked here, and though the photo in your link is gorgeous (as area all your favorites), if you look closely the sparks and the lighter don't line up. Eww. -Ben pcc (talk) 00:55, 26 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Support alternative if it is available for voting... You can see the elements of the lighter better in this picture... Gazhiley (talk) 12:29, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 00:33, 1 May 2010 (UTC)