Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Pistachio macro whitebackground.jpg

Pistachio

Reason: Good quality and EV. Not as easy as it seemed ;)
Articles this image appears in: Pistachio, Pistacia
Creator: Muhammad

Support as nominator --Muhammad(talk) 19:33, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
~~Comment~~ Support - There seems to be a white line along the bottom of the pistachio (between it and the shadow). Is that something that can be fixed? Nice job on the focus stacking, BTW. Kaldari (talk) 20:16, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- There was a minor clipping problem there. I redid that part only and replaced it with some more shadow. Since the edit was minimal, I have uploaded over the original. --Muhammad(talk) 19:36, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Sorry Muhammad but the lighting is not the best. Also, I wonder if a roasted pistachio can be considered as having a extraordinary EV... Finally, the mask is a bit obvious. Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:20, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I, personally, don't really see problems with EV. Spencer^{T♦Nominate!} 20:41, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- What is wrong with the lighting? A roasted pistachio surely has EV clearly demonstrating that pistachios are roasted before consumption. About the masking, it was my first attempt at it. I asked Noodle snacks to edit the original unmasked image which I hope fixes your concerns. --Muhammad(talk) 14:44, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Technical issues aside, it doesn't give me the sense of a pistachio. —Pengo 07:53, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- What do you mean by sense of pistachio? I am not sure I understand. --Muhammad(talk) 14:44, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - If I didn't already know what a pistachio was, I wouldn't be sure how to interpret this photo. —Pengo 07:39, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I don't have a problem with either the lighting or the EV. Detail is about as good as you could ever expect of a pistachio nut. :-) I'm not sure what a non-stacked photo of it would be like in terms of DOF, but this one is pretty flawless as far as I can tell. It might not be a photo that wows, but I can't really think of a better way to illustrate it, except maybe another one next to it de-shelled? Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 09:14, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I considered photographing a de-shelled one as well but thought it would be redundant since the texture of the seed can be see in this partially opened pistachio. --Muhammad(talk) 14:44, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Again, I think a size reference would be helpful. Spikebrennan (talk) 12:43, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The pistachio was exactly 1323mm long. If anybody wants to add the scale, feel free. Sorry I can't, I just spent the last 1.5 hours to upload the 570kb edit :( --Muhammad(talk) 14:47, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Poor Muhammad... Tanzania needs update their telecommunications. :-) Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 06:16, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - We're getting fiber optics in July, I think so it should be ok then. --Muhammad(talk) 08:02, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      - But what about your connection? I thought you were on dial-up? Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 08:25, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        I have a CDMA modem with shared bandwidth, getting a peak of 15kbps at night from 1am to 7am and a healthy 2-5kbps the rest of the time :) Broadband is available but very expensive, $100 for 1gb. --Muhammad(talk) 19:03, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support edit 1 Technical issues seem to have been fixed, agree with spikebrennan that a lot of these food pictures should indicate scale in some way now I come to think of it, but just mentioning it in the image caption/in the description is sufficient I think.Terri G (talk) 16:01, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Question. What exactly was wrong with the original image that prompted the edit? I can't see anything wrong with it as the masking issue was never really explained, and I'm not sure that I prefer the brightness in the edit. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 06:16, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- This was my first attempt at such an image and since some mentioned that the masking was not properly done, I asked NS to edit the original and provide a properly masked version. Regarding the brightness, NS could you reduce? --Muhammad(talk) 07:59, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - I didn't worry about the brightness at all in the edit. I left that bit to you (I was just asked to mask it). The brightness is identical to the jpg you sent me, which was different from the above. Noodle snacks (talk) 05:34, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support edit 1 - Technical issues appear to be resolved. — neuro^{(talk)(review)} 04:29, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
~~Conditional~~ support edit 1 - Appears to be a salted roasted pistachio. If so, image page and captions should say so. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 13:01, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Done I don't know I could have forgotten --Muhammad(talk) 15:20, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Great, then. Though I think I'd prefer it a little darker, it seems at the high end of a reasonable range of brightness. Maybe not as dark as in the initial version, though, which is on the lower end. That said... 1.5 hours to upload?! Darn! Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 15:32, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - I am not very good with adjusting brightnesses. If anybody wishes to upload a slightly darker version... --Muhammad(talk) 07:08, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Pistachio macro whitebackground NS.jpg MER-C 09:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]