Wikipedia:Picture peer review/Accurist Watches

Accurist Watches


A similar style of picture, the Monitinari Milano, was an FP but is this good enough?


 * Creator:&#0149;xytram&#0149; tk cs gy 14:05, 5 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Nominated by: &#0149;xytram&#0149; tk cs gy 14:05, 5 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Comments:
 * I really like that second photo. Clearly its got artistic merit being and FP on the commons. I think that its small resolution (less than the 1000px limit) would really hurt it FPC. Do you have a higher res version? - (Giligone (talk) 14:28, 5 September 2008 (UTC))
 * Yes, second one is two small, first one is big enough, but showing two similar watches is repetitive. I'm not sure of the encyclopedic value of the long exposure showing four seconds elapsing, although it's kind of cool to see... Fletcher (talk) 15:16, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Please note that the second one is a Commons FP - they have somewhat different criteria than we do on Wikipedia. --jjron (talk) 08:47, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Let me also add that 'product' shots like this get an unusually tough time at FPC. Be prepared for that if you do decide to nominate. Things like the blown (?) areas on the left watch and the defined reflection on the watch faces would likely engender opposition. --jjron (talk) 08:49, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for all your comments. Jjron I can see your point about the left watch (the over-exposed areas on the edge, plus the reflection is my head!) &#0149;xytram&#0149; tk cs gy 14:56, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Seconder:

