Weak Support - it's a very good picture overall, and we're unlikely to get another like it - but around the feet, it looks like it's been cut out from its background and left pixelated edges, particularly the subject's right big toe; and the upper hips. I commend you for your bravery though. For one thing, it's not often we get a penis in addition to the face of its owner on WP, but a free-licensed full body shot is very encyclopaedic, high quality and useful to the encyclopedia in many ways. —
Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ20:16, 24 August 2008 (UTC)reply
comment. Yes, the background has been cut away from hips and down. It can be done better, though. Perhaps the nomination could be postponed until it's done better (could do it in the weekend or so).
Mikael Häggström (
talk)
04:51, 25 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Comment Posing without underpants was ok because it was for the sake of science. Sunbathing so wasn't, because it didn't feel like it was for science. If it makes it more suitable, however, it may be justified to do so for any further pictures. Any new version, however, may take long time (classes just started today), much longer than a week, as a stated earlier, so let's decide what to do with this one first.
Mikael Häggström (
talk)
14:52, 25 August 2008 (UTC)reply
I mean all of those and also poor detail, general unsharpness and unsufficient resolution. For an easy shot like this there is little excuse for not showing photographic excelence --
Alvesgaspar (
talk)
18:47, 26 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Uncle.bungle. Not a bad shot; might make a viable candidate at the Commons Valued Image program. And with regard to Vanderdecken's comment, as a Commons admin it's nearly as rare that we get the subject's face in addition to his privates.
DurovaCharge!22:00, 24 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Weak Support - it's a very good picture overall, and we're unlikely to get another like it - but around the feet, it looks like it's been cut out from its background and left pixelated edges, particularly the subject's right big toe; and the upper hips. I commend you for your bravery though. For one thing, it's not often we get a penis in addition to the face of its owner on WP, but a free-licensed full body shot is very encyclopaedic, high quality and useful to the encyclopedia in many ways. —
Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ20:16, 24 August 2008 (UTC)reply
comment. Yes, the background has been cut away from hips and down. It can be done better, though. Perhaps the nomination could be postponed until it's done better (could do it in the weekend or so).
Mikael Häggström (
talk)
04:51, 25 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Comment Posing without underpants was ok because it was for the sake of science. Sunbathing so wasn't, because it didn't feel like it was for science. If it makes it more suitable, however, it may be justified to do so for any further pictures. Any new version, however, may take long time (classes just started today), much longer than a week, as a stated earlier, so let's decide what to do with this one first.
Mikael Häggström (
talk)
14:52, 25 August 2008 (UTC)reply
I mean all of those and also poor detail, general unsharpness and unsufficient resolution. For an easy shot like this there is little excuse for not showing photographic excelence --
Alvesgaspar (
talk)
18:47, 26 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Uncle.bungle. Not a bad shot; might make a viable candidate at the Commons Valued Image program. And with regard to Vanderdecken's comment, as a Commons admin it's nearly as rare that we get the subject's face in addition to his privates.
DurovaCharge!22:00, 24 August 2008 (UTC)reply