Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Pasta

Pasta[edit]

Tubular pasta, strung together, at a store in Porto Venere, Italy.

Self nomination - just wanted to see how this works. I'm a very amateur photographer, but I'd like to contribute some more photographs to wikiepdia in the future. This is just a picture I took of a pasta shop in Porto Venere, Italy. It appears in the pasta article. Any thoughts on possible ways to improve it? I have Photoshop CS and have been playing around, but I think the original's color hues and such look the best.

Self-Nominate and support. - Tejastheory 22:15, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I like this piccture. The pasta is sharp, and the image is nice to look at. --Ironchef8000 23:14, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Nice picture, quality and DOF are pleasant to look at. Yet to provide a significant contibution to the Pasta article I'd expect the picture to show a variety of different pasta styles. --Dschwen 17:12, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I agree with Dschwen's comment about the contribution to an article. Enochlau 03:24, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - good quality pic but not enough varieties, and not striking enough (please don't ask me to define striking!) - Adrian Pingstone 10:54, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Hrmm I suppose you guys are right - doesn't exactly contribute enough to the article to really be a feature article. Should I remove this, or does that automatically get done?
- Just wait until this process finishes. It lasts 14 days, then pruning is done "automatically" — Sverdrup 00:58, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This is probably the best picture of pasta I've ever seen. Or at least I've never seen pasta strung like that. I like the picture a lot and would rather pick on it's technical weak spots than composition or actual information content. I don't agree about your point of wanting the "most complete picture" to illustrate an article. A picture doesn't need to be all and everything there is to a subject to be really good. Just look at our best chess picture (IMO); it does not show a chess board set up for a game. — Sverdrup 00:58, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I have to agree with Sverdrup here. Image:Plums.jpg only shows one variety of plum and it is featured, as is Image:Grapes.jpg. I don't see any difference between them and this image: if they contribute to their articles well enough to be featured, this one surely does as well. Just because it doesn't show 10 or more varieties of pasta doesn't mean it doesn't show what pasta is. Raven4x4x 07:59, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - It just means it shouldn't be featured. The grape pic is quite a bad example by the way, weird colors, low resolution. A pic that should rather be unfeatured than serve as an argument. As far as the plum pic goes, it shows the fruit as it is growing. Hard to put more than one variety on the same tree. And pasta wasn't growing on trees last time I checked ;-) --Dschwen 16:19, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    - I don't see anything wrong with the grape pic, but that's another topic. My point is that I say this contributes perfectly well to the article. However, I'm neutral overall because I don't like the composition an awful lot. Raven4x4x 00:36, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like it, thats all i can say 24.34.188.211 02:30, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, anonymous editors cannot vote. Please register. Enochlau 00:16, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice image and angle. Rmpfu89 13:18, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Added an edited version (warmed, brightened), but still don't think either version worthy. --Fir0002 10:22, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted Raven4x4x 02:47, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]