Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Clayton Anderson - weightlessness

Astronaut Clayton Anderson during the STS-131 mission edit

Original - Astronaut Clayton Anderson watches as a water bubble floats in the middeck of space shuttle Discovery during the STS-131 mission

Edit 1 - Less cropping

Reason: This picture is of high quality, a good example of weightlessness and cohesion in space and an example for the STS-131 mission
Articles in which this image appears: Weightlessness, Clayton Anderson, STS-131
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Aeronautics and aviation
Creator: edited and uploaded by Hive001, Original created by NASA

Support as nominator --Hive001 contact 16:00, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cool picture. Yes, the guy in the background is a bit out of focus. But the water ball (the focus point, both literally and figuratively) is tack sharp. As it is exceedingly hard to re-take the picture, I’d like to see it on Wikipedia’s Main Page for 24 hours. And, by the way; this picture works quite well upside down. Greg L (talk) 19:53, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Greg, acceptable but not amazing technicals outweighed by value and rarity. It works well on the side too - there is no up or down, it's space! HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 02:27, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support The guy's face in the background is not the main focus of the shot, and as such is supposed to be out of focus. The floating ball of water with his image in it is the focus of the shot. — raeky ^{(talk | edits)} 06:14, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Barely meets size requirements and quality is not very good --Muhammad(talk) 06:54, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I don't know why the picture site on Wikipedia shows a lower quality ((1,024 × 768 pixels, file size: 67 KB) than the one on Commons. If you go the the site on Commons you'll see that it is bigger (1,322 × 780 pixels, file size: 354 KB). Maybe this problem came up when I uploaded a new version of this picture (my first upload was the wrong version). Has anyone an idea how to update the image page on Wikipedia? Hive001 contact 07:41, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And yes, the guy is supposed to be out of focus. As said above Hive001 contact 07:46, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen both versions. The one nominated here barely meets the requirements now(and we are in the process of upping those). --Muhammad(talk) 15:19, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question Could you be more specific as to the source of the image for the image description page? I ask partially because the cropped version is a higher resolution than the uncropped version [1], which is a bit odd. Jujutacular ^T · C 22:42, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

is it cropped or just another image, I thought it was just another image zoomed in that someone replaced the zoomed out with...? — raeky ^{(talk | edits)} 00:14, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The original, which is a huge file, can be downloaded here [2]. I cropped it to the interesting stuff. As I said, my first upload was the wrong version (just a smaller version of the uncropped original) Hive001 contact 08:38, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see, thank you. I think it would be little bit better not so cropped, so I added an edit. Support edit 1. Jujutacular ^T · C 14:52, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mhm, I still prefer the cropped version. Only the bubble is in focus and Clayton Anderson has an ugly shadow on the chin. Hive001 contact 16:26, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment What's most interesting is the optics of the image produced, which isn't being explained. I take it the water ball is behaving as a completely spherical convex mirror, but it's amazing it can route the light all the way around it, if i'm seeing this right. Fletcher (talk) 12:00, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe there's scope for using it in some articles on optics, but it's not being used that way yet. --Avenue (talk) 14:52, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support original cropped version, not the broader view per Hive001 (chin shadow, focus) and due to distracting background. --Avenue (talk) 14:52, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support either --Avala (talk) 13:30, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support original. The image benefits from emphasized bubble I think. Brandmeister[t] 17:27, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support original. It just has a certain quality that grabs the viewer's interest. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:36, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Clayton Anderson zero g.jpg --Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 14:35, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]