Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2011 at 10:46:33 (UTC)
Original - Canon EOS 5D Mark II camera, with Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM lens (fitted with a B+W 010 UV-Haze 58mm filter).Edit1 - increased canvas size (no other alterations)
Reason
Excellent quality image, a lot higher than some of our other studio FP's. Give's accurate representation and is lead image.
I disagree. I edited it after checking it on the article page (it's pretty immaterial what it looks like here after all). It's too tight. You're free to oppose the edit, but Closer please note that my support is only for the Edit. --
jjron (
talk)
13:35, 30 September 2011 (UTC)reply
I can support both, the quality is still there and there is certainly no reason to oppose. Your perfectly right in that it looks better in thumbnail. My only point was that on the 5Dii page it looks fine filling the area as it does, and as that is the image's prime use, isn't that what's important?
JFitch(talk)11:33, 1 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Support edit per image quality (have no idea about abundance of FPs on this topic). Yes, the crop of the original is too tight even for me (who crops too tight for thumbnail purposes :).
Materialscientist (
talk)
00:51, 1 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2011 at 10:46:33 (UTC)
Original - Canon EOS 5D Mark II camera, with Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM lens (fitted with a B+W 010 UV-Haze 58mm filter).Edit1 - increased canvas size (no other alterations)
Reason
Excellent quality image, a lot higher than some of our other studio FP's. Give's accurate representation and is lead image.
I disagree. I edited it after checking it on the article page (it's pretty immaterial what it looks like here after all). It's too tight. You're free to oppose the edit, but Closer please note that my support is only for the Edit. --
jjron (
talk)
13:35, 30 September 2011 (UTC)reply
I can support both, the quality is still there and there is certainly no reason to oppose. Your perfectly right in that it looks better in thumbnail. My only point was that on the 5Dii page it looks fine filling the area as it does, and as that is the image's prime use, isn't that what's important?
JFitch(talk)11:33, 1 October 2011 (UTC)reply
Support edit per image quality (have no idea about abundance of FPs on this topic). Yes, the crop of the original is too tight even for me (who crops too tight for thumbnail purposes :).
Materialscientist (
talk)
00:51, 1 October 2011 (UTC)reply