Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Carambola cross section

Carambola

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2010 at 10:51:18 (UTC)

Reason

High resolution, detail and EV. Cross section illustrates in an instant its unusual fivefold symmetry, and clearly shows why this fruit is also called starfruit.

Articles in which this image appears

Carambola, Oxalidaceae, Averrhoa, Averrhoa carambola and Pentagon

FP category for this image

Plants/Fruits

Creator

S Masters

• Support as nominator --S Masters (talk) 10:51, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• 3/4 support I think a perfect collage would show both the attached and unattached ends of the fruit. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 11:05, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Slight preference for original or edit 3 (most preferred) - even "floating" without shadows would be okay for me, I think. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 11:07, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The shadows look really unnatural to me. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 19:40, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The are unnatural. Why we are adding fake shadows to pictures, I don't know... J Milburn (talk) 23:42, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The problem that I have is that I currently can't afford professional lighting equipment. Using natural light indoors, the shadows are very long. When I combine the pictures together, the overlapping pictures would cut off the long shadows. So I have no choice but to try to recreate the shadows. Would it be better to not to have shadows at all? Otherwise, I will have to retake the pictures, but I don't think that I can do it for quite sometime. S Masters (talk) 01:14, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest you heed the advice on my talk page and make a cardboard light tent. Something like this is all I mean. I wouldn't be surprised if you could scrounge the materials from around the house (baking or tracing paper will do for the windows). The desk lamps wouldn't be very bright compared to a flash though, so you will probably need a tripod.

talk) 03:00, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks Noodle snacks, I did follow your suggestions and tried to light it but I had some problems as I do not have directional desk lamps. Anyway, I feel that I have no other choice but to retake new photos, and with the help of a side flash, I have come up with a new version. S Masters (talk) 06:54, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• I just realized something: why all the fruit FPs have only a transversal cut? How about showing a longitudinal one also? —Preceding
  Nergaal (talk • contribs
  ) 07:40, 28 October 2010

Do you mean to cut it longways? I guess one of the main reasons for me to present it this way is to illustrate its most interesting feature – it looks like a star when cut. Unfortunately, I only had three fruits and once cut, it starts to discolour, so they have all been eaten. S Masters (talk) 08:04, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. It is an unusual fruit and I think it might have more EV to have the longitudinal cut also.

Nergaal (talk) 08:11, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

As I said, I wanted to show the star, I guess a longitudinal cut will look a bit like a yellow cross section of a rugby ball or American football. The other thing is that I would have to use two fruits, and each fruit will be different from the other in terms their shapes. For example, the fruits that I had were all different sizes. You can see from the re-take that the star shape is different. In any case, I do not have any more fruits left to be able to do this. I will try to do this with the next fruit that I take. Thanks for the suggestion. – S Masters (talk) 08:41, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Can you use the shadows from the second pic and the fruit from the original? As I'm sure you agree, the exposure isn't so crash hot in the second take. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 21:24, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The new one has considerably lower resolution and blown highlights (drop the exposure a bit). Getting there though.
    talk) 07:59, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Changes made to file size, exposure and highlights as per suggestions. Please note that the difference in color between the two fruits is because they are different fruits and one is riper than the other by about a week. Using the original image with the shadows from the second shoot doesn't really work as the shapes are slightly different. – S Masters (talk) 14:45, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I have done a version using the original picture with the real shadows from the second shoot. – S Masters (talk) 15:47, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome! Strong support edit 3! :) Aaadddaaammm (talk) 20:52, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Support edit 3 Original shadows weren't that bad! Centy – reply • contribs – 02:31, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Support edit 3 Looking good now. Jujutacular ^talk 15:46, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Conditional Support Edit 3 The stitching between shadow and white is clearly visible in 3. Someone needs to use the blur tool and hide it. Looking good otherwise.
  talk) 01:35, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Thanks, stitching fixed. – S Masters (talk) 02:06, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Support edit 3: Looks nice. Shadows are much better natural.
  talk 07:45, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Promoted File:Carambola Starfruit.jpg --Makeemlighter (talk) 01:01, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]