This is an old revision of this page, as edited by KP Botany (talk | contribs) at 17:38, 15 May 2009 (→Dental Pulp: ahhgggg). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 17:38, 15 May 2009 by KP Botany (talk | contribs) (→Dental Pulp: ahhgggg)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Dental Pulp
- Reason
- Think photo shows a rare and striking example of an almost complete pulp tissue of a human premolar
- Articles this image appears in
- Pulp (tooth), Endodontic therapy
- Creator
- DRosenbach
- Support as nominator I recognize that it's dark, but the flash obliterated the pulp tissue --DRosenbach 19:51, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose The flash obliterating the pulp tissue is not an exception I'd take to support. Perhaps taking the image at a brighter location would have been better, or using a software, like Photoshop, to adjust white balance & contrast. The brightness isn't the only problem. There are DoF issues, and the resolution is not high enough to show details. ZooFari 23:42, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose Too dark and blurry, and the composition leads my eyes away from the pulp. There's probably not enough data here to allow it to be post-processed to FP standard. If you find any more of these things crawling around, I'd go for a smaller aperture and a longer exposure. Also, the image page could use some more detail, such as how old was the patient, is this healthy tissue or diseased, male/female, when was the photo taken, and what kind of camera. Wronkiew (talk) 05:10, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
- Ahhgggg! --KP Botany (talk) 17:38, 15 May 2009 (UTC)