34:
147:
44:
64:
54:
131:
It looks no matter what time of the day I take the pictures there are always some shadows. I just like to mention that, when we talk about surfing the wave is as much as a subject as a surfer is. I could have used much bigger zoom to bring a surfer closer, but I did not do it in purpose. I wanted to
207:
I still prefer my images to the ones that were mentioned by Fir0002 and Jjron (not because what you think lol). In my opinion to show surfing (please notice surfing not a surfer) is important to show the power of the wave and, if possible to show a movemet of a surfer like in the last nominated
193:
Sorry, have to agree with above re poor lighting - the sun's just in the wrong position. I'm not overly taken with either of Fir0002's linked images either, but I see what he means, I don't think surfing photos are that hard to get and I reckon a
Wikipedian can get one. Even the first
258:? (Assuming the EXIF data is correct...) I'd be really careful getting that close with a body (and possibly a lens) that isn't weather-sealed to resist moisture, sand, salt, etc. I believe most surfing photos are taken at around 400mm, which is a more comfortable distance (and
223:
Per
Devibort. I think the lighting isn't as big of a deal as the detail that is missing. Just a little too blurry. When you open up full-size and view the surfer, there really isn't that much detail there. Better than all other surfer photos in WP,
153:
Poor lighting. I also agree with
Debivort re:not close enough. Waves are all well and good but to illustrate surfing I'd want to see something a bit closer or a different angle. I'm not saying it necessarily should be nominated by I think
208:
image. I agree that images of surfers are common and I share the concern about lighting. Thank you all for taking your time to write the comments and to vote.Jjron, thank you for recapturing the images. --
311:
301:
195:
17:
158:
would make a better candidate. And no it's not what you're thinking! It is a better candidate thanks to the much better lighting and composition.
306:
177:
I have recaptioned the pictures as
Original 1 - 4; they were captioned as Edits, which they're not as they're all different pictures. --
239:
Thank you,Puddyglum. It is why I nominated the images because in my opinion they are better than any other one on WP so far.--
122:- subject is comparatively small, and details are lost in the shadow, a different time of day would probably fix this.
287:
266:
243:
231:
212:
202:
181:
166:
136:
126:
114:
282:
259:
276:
159:
155:
263:
80:
Surfing is a very popular activity and I do not believe we have any FP for this kind of sport.
33:
255:
228:
198:
in the surfing article is clearer, though obviously not up to FPC quality standards. --
295:
123:
163:
146:
199:
178:
87:
240:
209:
133:
111:
95:
43:
63:
53:
132:
show the wave. Thank you for your vote and comment, Debivort.--
8:
312:Featured picture nominations/September 2007
18:Knowledge (XXG):Featured picture candidates
62:
52:
42:
32:
7:
302:Ended featured picture nominations
24:
145:
267:20:44, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
244:18:17, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
232:17:14, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
213:13:09, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
203:09:11, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
182:08:50, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
167:05:24, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
137:04:05, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
127:23:57, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
115:18:25, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
92:Articles this image appears in
1:
307:Featured picture nominations
288:14:20, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
328:
254:- 110mm focal length on a
162:is also a better option --
86:A surfer in Santa Cruz,
70:
60:
50:
40:
66:
56:
46:
36:
109:Support as nominator
260:more expensive lens
262:!). Just a tip. --
71:
61:
51:
41:
256:Digital Rebel XTi
156:this (free) image
319:
285:
279:
149:
83:Proposed caption
327:
326:
322:
321:
320:
318:
317:
316:
292:
291:
283:
277:
31:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
325:
323:
315:
314:
309:
304:
294:
293:
273:Not promoted
270:
269:
249:
248:
247:
226:
225:
218:
217:
216:
187:
186:
185:
184:
143:
142:
141:
140:
117:
105:
104:
101:
98:
93:
90:
84:
81:
78:
73:
30:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
324:
313:
310:
308:
305:
303:
300:
299:
297:
290:
289:
286:
280:
274:
268:
265:
261:
257:
253:
250:
245:
242:
238:
237:
236:
235:
234:
233:
230:
222:
219:
214:
211:
206:
205:
204:
201:
197:
192:
189:
188:
183:
180:
176:
173:
172:
171:
170:
169:
168:
165:
161:
157:
152:
148:
138:
135:
130:
129:
128:
125:
121:
118:
116:
113:
110:
107:
106:
102:
99:
97:
94:
91:
89:
85:
82:
79:
76:
75:
74:
69:
65:
59:
55:
49:
45:
39:
35:
29:
26:
19:
272:
271:
251:
227:
220:
190:
174:
150:
144:
119:
108:
72:
67:
57:
47:
37:
27:
221:Weak oppose
191:Oppose all.
120:weak oppose
296:Categories
88:California
68:Original 4
58:Original 3
48:Original 2
38:Original 1
229:Puddyglum
175:Comment.
160:This one
124:Debivort
278:Chris B
252:Comment
224:though.
164:Fir0002
100:Creator
96:surfing
28:Surfing
151:Oppose
77:Reason
264:Peter
200:jjron
196:image
179:jjron
16:<
284:talk
246:Mbz1
241:Mbz1
215:Mbz1
210:Mbz1
139:Mbz1
134:Mbz1
112:Mbz1
103:Mbz1
275:--
298::
281:•
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
