Cello bridge
This is a good picture of the cello's bridge, mute, and f-holes. I acknowledge that it is slightly out of focus near the edge, but I really like the views; "Image:Cello bridge.jpg" appears in Cello, and Turidoth created the image.
- Nominate and support. - Tewy 23:02, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. The highlights on the strings are blown, the bright white blob to the left is distracting, what appears to be a table leg blends in with the body of the cello, the background on the right is distracting, one of the f-holes is cut-off, and I think that it could be better lit. --
Pharaoh Hound 23:50, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: I think the complaint about the strings being blow is a bit silly, but the rest is spot on. A shallower DOF would be preferable. -- Gmaxwell 00:12, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Comment gees, they're harsh! :) It's a pretty good photo of the bridge, but the cropping of the shot as a whole isn't the best. Is the black thing that the strings are attached to supposed to be in the photo? If so, it shouldn't be cropped out like that. On the other hand, the table leg to the right, and bright glare to the left are, as mentioned, a bit annoying. The colours and detail of the strings is really pretty good though. Agree with comment about blown highlights on strings though - particularly the thickest string. Stevage 08:19, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Edit 1 is too dark on the knobs, compared to the original. — BRIAN 0918 • 2006-06-20 12:57
- I've attempted to fix the problems with the image, including the blob on the left, the table on the right, and the strings. Of course, getting rid of the table required some major retouching of the floor, but the floor isn't important to the image. — BRIAN 0918 • 2006-06-20 13:41
- Very nice, but the white space on the left is very weird - there's a kind of diagonal strip texture running through it, but only for a small part? What's going on there?
Stevage 15:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- I noticed it too... it might be wood grain.. not sure. I don't think it's any more distracting than the wood grain on the other side. —
BRIAN
0918 • 2006-06-20 17:12
- Ok, I really like this edit (2), how might the picture look if the "white blob" became the same color scheme as the floor on the right? Might that balance the picture out so the focus could be put on the cello itself? Tewy 20:46, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- I noticed it too... it might be wood grain.. not sure. I don't think it's any more distracting than the wood grain on the other side. —
BRIAN
0918 • 2006-06-20 17:12
- Very nice, but the white space on the left is very weird - there's a kind of diagonal strip texture running through it, but only for a small part? What's going on there?
Stevage 15:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. Ok, I dont know about the technical attributes of the picture (neither do 80% of wikipedians I bet) but I find it incredibly boring, along with the subject. It's not that I don't like cellos, but what is interesting about a cello bridge in particular? 83.67.37.71 14:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Featured Picture isn't about choosing pictures beautiful in their own right, but about choosing images which very nicely illustrate a given topic. Given that we want a photo of a cello bridge (just as we want photos of everything), could you do much better than this? Stevage 15:19, 20 June 2006 (UTC) and i smell like monkeys
- Oppose, there's nothing really eyecatching in this photo since the bridge isn't a particularly detailed piece with parts to be illustrated. Night Gyr 19:19, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose edits 1 and 2. Edit 1 has all the problems of the original. And in Edit 2 in the place table where leg was removed there are obvious cloning marks, and the white to the left is still distracting. -- Pharaoh Hound 00:06, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- The cloning marks are glaringly obvious, regardless of whether one compares it to the previous versions or not, as the amount of blurriness doesn't match up with the depth of field of the rest of the image. -- Pharaoh Hound 12:13, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- I really have to disagree there - I struggle to see anything that is obviously "cloning marks", even when comparing directly to the original version. On the other hand, there are jpeg artifacts on the dark wood (the side of the cello) next to where the table was. Hmm.
Stevage 13:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- I guess the term "obvious cloning marks" is rather individual interpritation. I can see what I think is siginificant differences in texture of the fixed and not-fixed wood, and there' a part of the fixed area that looks very strange to me, sort of a weird bulging effect, though I will admit that they are fairly faint, but it just looks fake to me (for some reason). For me it looks more fake when I look at the whole image, it blends fairly well if you scrutinize the image at full resolution looking for one little part that isn't right. Agree about the JPG artifacts. -- Pharaoh Hound 14:15, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- I really have to disagree there - I struggle to see anything that is obviously "cloning marks", even when comparing directly to the original version. On the other hand, there are jpeg artifacts on the dark wood (the side of the cello) next to where the table was. Hmm.
Stevage 13:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not sure if this is proper Wiki format, but can I request that someone edit this photo to remove the white, probably replacing it with that floor theme? I would like to see how this picture does without all of the talk about the background. Thanks. Tewy 01:18, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- Support Edit 2 The colors seem better in this edit. R'son-W 20:25, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Not promoted Raven4x4x 07:22, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
The bridge is the most important part! It holds the strings up for goodness sakes. ... I like all the pictures. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.24.41.157 ( talk) 22:20, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Cello bridge
This is a good picture of the cello's bridge, mute, and f-holes. I acknowledge that it is slightly out of focus near the edge, but I really like the views; "Image:Cello bridge.jpg" appears in Cello, and Turidoth created the image.
- Nominate and support. - Tewy 23:02, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. The highlights on the strings are blown, the bright white blob to the left is distracting, what appears to be a table leg blends in with the body of the cello, the background on the right is distracting, one of the f-holes is cut-off, and I think that it could be better lit. --
Pharaoh Hound 23:50, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: I think the complaint about the strings being blow is a bit silly, but the rest is spot on. A shallower DOF would be preferable. -- Gmaxwell 00:12, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Comment gees, they're harsh! :) It's a pretty good photo of the bridge, but the cropping of the shot as a whole isn't the best. Is the black thing that the strings are attached to supposed to be in the photo? If so, it shouldn't be cropped out like that. On the other hand, the table leg to the right, and bright glare to the left are, as mentioned, a bit annoying. The colours and detail of the strings is really pretty good though. Agree with comment about blown highlights on strings though - particularly the thickest string. Stevage 08:19, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Edit 1 is too dark on the knobs, compared to the original. — BRIAN 0918 • 2006-06-20 12:57
- I've attempted to fix the problems with the image, including the blob on the left, the table on the right, and the strings. Of course, getting rid of the table required some major retouching of the floor, but the floor isn't important to the image. — BRIAN 0918 • 2006-06-20 13:41
- Very nice, but the white space on the left is very weird - there's a kind of diagonal strip texture running through it, but only for a small part? What's going on there?
Stevage 15:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- I noticed it too... it might be wood grain.. not sure. I don't think it's any more distracting than the wood grain on the other side. —
BRIAN
0918 • 2006-06-20 17:12
- Ok, I really like this edit (2), how might the picture look if the "white blob" became the same color scheme as the floor on the right? Might that balance the picture out so the focus could be put on the cello itself? Tewy 20:46, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- I noticed it too... it might be wood grain.. not sure. I don't think it's any more distracting than the wood grain on the other side. —
BRIAN
0918 • 2006-06-20 17:12
- Very nice, but the white space on the left is very weird - there's a kind of diagonal strip texture running through it, but only for a small part? What's going on there?
Stevage 15:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. Ok, I dont know about the technical attributes of the picture (neither do 80% of wikipedians I bet) but I find it incredibly boring, along with the subject. It's not that I don't like cellos, but what is interesting about a cello bridge in particular? 83.67.37.71 14:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Featured Picture isn't about choosing pictures beautiful in their own right, but about choosing images which very nicely illustrate a given topic. Given that we want a photo of a cello bridge (just as we want photos of everything), could you do much better than this? Stevage 15:19, 20 June 2006 (UTC) and i smell like monkeys
- Oppose, there's nothing really eyecatching in this photo since the bridge isn't a particularly detailed piece with parts to be illustrated. Night Gyr 19:19, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose edits 1 and 2. Edit 1 has all the problems of the original. And in Edit 2 in the place table where leg was removed there are obvious cloning marks, and the white to the left is still distracting. -- Pharaoh Hound 00:06, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- The cloning marks are glaringly obvious, regardless of whether one compares it to the previous versions or not, as the amount of blurriness doesn't match up with the depth of field of the rest of the image. -- Pharaoh Hound 12:13, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- I really have to disagree there - I struggle to see anything that is obviously "cloning marks", even when comparing directly to the original version. On the other hand, there are jpeg artifacts on the dark wood (the side of the cello) next to where the table was. Hmm.
Stevage 13:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- I guess the term "obvious cloning marks" is rather individual interpritation. I can see what I think is siginificant differences in texture of the fixed and not-fixed wood, and there' a part of the fixed area that looks very strange to me, sort of a weird bulging effect, though I will admit that they are fairly faint, but it just looks fake to me (for some reason). For me it looks more fake when I look at the whole image, it blends fairly well if you scrutinize the image at full resolution looking for one little part that isn't right. Agree about the JPG artifacts. -- Pharaoh Hound 14:15, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- I really have to disagree there - I struggle to see anything that is obviously "cloning marks", even when comparing directly to the original version. On the other hand, there are jpeg artifacts on the dark wood (the side of the cello) next to where the table was. Hmm.
Stevage 13:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not sure if this is proper Wiki format, but can I request that someone edit this photo to remove the white, probably replacing it with that floor theme? I would like to see how this picture does without all of the talk about the background. Thanks. Tewy 01:18, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- Support Edit 2 The colors seem better in this edit. R'son-W 20:25, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Not promoted Raven4x4x 07:22, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
The bridge is the most important part! It holds the strings up for goodness sakes. ... I like all the pictures. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.24.41.157 ( talk) 22:20, 8 May 2008 (UTC)