Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/salad

Salad


Nice, appetizing image.


 * Support Self Nom. --Fir0002 style="color:#C6CACC; background:#F8FCFF">www 12:24, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Support Food seems to be opposed a lot, but this is a good image. Nice and crisp. --liquidGhoul 13:00, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Whoa, I just noticed Image:Salad platter.jpg, which is heaps better. I Support it, although it needs some cropping from the top and bottom. --liquidGhoul 00:25, 7 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Sorry. The foreground is empty, and the elements in the background (the mug and the bread) are distracting. Dr Zak 13:51, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Opp agree with Dr Zak. Will support if they are removed. chowells 14:17, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Support. The background has distracting elements. Good resolution, the subject is well prepared and contributes well to its article. --Pharaoh Hound 17:40, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Support of both versions. Much improved. The "salad platter"  looks fake (for some odd reason), however it probably is more encyclopedic. I like the close-up view of the cropped one, but it may be too close cut, and the distracting elements -though mush less visible- are still there. --Pharaoh Hound 13:10, 8 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Weak support - could someone crop some white space out of the front though, and maybe out of the back? Stevage 18:56, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Opppose I found the burnt out foreground and the blurry background too irritating - Adrian Pingstone 20:21, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. It is a nice appetizing image, I find the blank foreground jarring, and the cropped sides as well.  I do like the bread and mug, though.--ragesoss 21:28, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I've uploaded a cropped version. If you want to see other versions: Image:Salad platter.jpg, Image:Cold meat salad.jpg --Fir0002 style="color:#C6CACC; background:#F8FCFF">www 23:46, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
 * The cropped version is difficult to put into perspective because it's so cut off. I'd say Image:Salad platter.jpg is the most encyclopedic. bcasterline t 23:57, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I prefer the totally uncropped version. Not sure why you were trying to keep the bread out of the original one :) Stevage 09:09, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh there're two different shots (obviously of the same thing). I just perfered to close up one. I don't know why but I'm really partial to that white "clean" look which I think the first one really has. To my mind it's a nearly perfect stock shot. But that's just me :-) --Fir0002 style="color:#C6CACC; background:#F8FCFF">www 09:28, 7 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Oppose the background is a bit too blurry and the white background is too artificial. Bonus Onus 22:14, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Image:Salad platter.jpg
Comment I've rearranged the nom like this. Hope nobody minds... --Fir0002 style="color:#C6CACC; background:#F8FCFF">www 11:49, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Whoa, I just noticed Image:Salad platter.jpg, which is heaps better. I Support it, although it needs some cropping from the top and bottom. --liquidGhoul 00:25, 7 May 2006 (UTC) ( moved from original context higher in the page )
 * Support Image:Salad platter.jpg. Mmmmh! Dr Zak 01:36, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Support of both versions. Much improved. The "salad platter"  looks fake (for some odd reason), however it probably is more encyclopedic. I like the close-up view of the cropped one, but it may be too close cut, and the distracting elements -though mush less visible- are still there. --Pharaoh Hound 13:10, 8 May 2006 (UTC) ( moved from original context higher in the page )
 * Support the "salad platter" (full view of plate). Stevage 20:45, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Support Image:Salad platter.jpg. bcasterline t 01:54, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Symbol support vote.png|15px]] Strong Support for Image:Salad platter.jpg (those sun dried tomatoes look too nice), although I might suggest the description on the image page is expanded somewhat... &mdash;Vanderdecken&there4; &int;  &xi;  &phi;   10:13, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Support Image:Salad platter.jpg. Redquark 18:47, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Support the cropped version. More food pics, please! Bertilvidet 15:33, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Support Image:Salad platter.jpg. I like seeing the whole context.  howch e  ng   {chat} 16:45, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. The salad platter. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 15:44, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Support any of them, they're pretty good for food pictures. --Lewk_of_S e rthic contrib talk 20:53, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose, Don't like the white backround, it doens't look appetising and I eat salad a few times a week -- BWF89 02:58, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Eat... I mean... Support Image:Salad platter.jpg. — Cuivi é  nen  ( talk • contribs ) , Wednesday, 10 May 2006 @ 03:00 UTC
 * Oppose. Full-size, the photo looks rather unremarkable. I think it's the lighting. The angle of the plate is also offputting, but as I don't think it's FP-standard, I'm not experimenting. BigBlueFish 21:41, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The white background makes this photo look too artificial even though the plate itself looks good. I think that having a plate out of context is not very encyclopedic-- not a good explanation of the purpose of salad (i.e. to be eaten) Bonus Onus 22:14, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose all versions. Uninteresting subject photographed as if for advertising purposes. It's nice enough, but this looks like something out of an upscale supermarket circular. Mooveeguy 17:12, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Um why exacatly is it a problem that it looks like an "upscale supermarket circular". I would have thought that a good thing. Certainly I can't see it as a valid reason for opposing. --Fir0002 style="color:#C6CACC; background:#F8FCFF">www 07:50, 13 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment This image isn't in any article.Froggydarb 09:36, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Support on the condition that the photo find an article. TomStar81 01:10, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Have replaced original nomination in the page with Image:Salad platter.jpg --Fir0002 style="color:#C6CACC; background:#F8FCFF">www 09:20, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Closing comment: splitting up the vote like that halfway through really did not help me make the closing count! Some of the oppose votes left above the line, I judge as being equally applicable to the final version too (Adrian's, for example). With hindsight, I think it would have been better to start a new nom, or just to leave all versions in a single section &mdash; those of us who close these regularly are used to having to tot up support for differing versions. Anyway, gripe over with, the second vote passes 14/6 even if we still count Adrian's and chowells' opposes. I discounted ragesoss's oppose which obviously only applied to the original crop  ~ Veledan • Talk 10:14, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

~ Veledan • Talk 10:19, 14 May 2006 (UTC)