Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Unripe lemon

Unripe lemon


This is a good picture and helps illustrate the ripening article. By Jon Sullivan at pdphoto.org. Edit It is now also being used to illustrate green.


 * Nominate and support. —jiy (talk) 23:06, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose, odd angle, fruit partially covered by a leaf. A fruit at a later stage of ripening would more clearly illustrate the transition. A pretty good picture with some illustrative value, but not striking or brilliant. &mdash; David Remahl 00:03, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment I like the middle section, but the front of the photo is way too dark. I fixed it best I could, but I am still pretty neutral on this. I like the way the drips accentuate the pores in the skin. --liquidGhoul 07:53, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment I prefer the top one, strangely, I think the lighting looks better with the large shadows. I think it's a very nice photo (especially the water droplets, pores, and the soft focus on the background), and well taken, but it doesn't illustrate the article that well. Maybe half ripened would look better. At the moment that could be mistaken for a lime. My vote might change to a support after this has entered the voting period. Vanderdecken&emsp;&weierp;&zeta;&xi; 14:24, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * 4th image. &mdash;Vanderdecken&int; &xi; &phi; 15:49, 23 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Support. A very nice image. Enochlau 03:00, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. I like the top image better. Very nice. --Bash 05:02, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose first and second. The combination of the shadows and glean on the top, cover up way too much for an informative image. I don't like my edit, as some of the sheen on the skin is removed, and the leaf on the left looks weird (needs cropping?). If someone could fix that, I would consider supporting. --liquidGhoul 05:48, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Support 4th image --liquidGhoul 13:41, 17 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment - Using some extremely advanced techniques, I was able to somewhat remedy the lighting issue. I hope some people will find this acceptable. Please view the full images while making comparisons, some of the edits aren't readily noticable in the thumbnails.PiccoloNamek 07:16, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment I like your edit Piccolo, but it seems to have lost some sharpness in the background (which is good when it is caused by aperture, but when done im Photoshop it doesn't look that good IMO). So I have created yet another edit. --Fir0002 09:24, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * After a bit of comparison, I feel the fourth picture is the better one. The first is a little dark, the second looks quite unnatural with the shadows removed, the third is good but the fourth just brings out more detail in the background. I will support the fourth image. Raven4x4x 10:22, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Raven4x4x 06:10, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

