Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Apophysis fractal flame

Apophysis fractal flame

Reason: I believe the image meets all of the criteria for featured picture status on Wikipedia. It is entirely free use, a very large resolution and illustrates brilliantly what is possible with Apophysis and fractal flames in general.
Articles this image appears in: Apophysis (software), Fractal flame, Fractal
Creator: Garden

Support as nominator -- GARDEN 15:29, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Encyclopedic and gorgeous. Do you have a lava lamp to go with it? ;) Durova^Charge! 21:06, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, prettiful. Microchip08 21:40, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Question: Are the sides (namely the bottom) of the fractal supposed to be cut-off? Spencer^T♦^C 00:17, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, no, but zooming out would obviously cause the whole thing to get smaller. I can give it a whirl if you'd like to see the bits that didn't render? GARDEN 09:14, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Can you upload it as a different file? Looking at the image it only looks slightly cut-off, but if there's a lot more too it, I'd like to see it. Spencer^T♦^C 00:28, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yeah, sure. I'm rendering it now, should take about an hour. GARDEN 09:30, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      - Done. GARDEN 10:36, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        Oppose original, Weak oppose edit 1. I have to agree with Sasata below, and additionally us in a gallery in Apophysis (software) doesn't have too much enc. Spencer^T♦^C 21:37, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- <-- Ok. I can attempt to expand Apophysis (software) to allow more thumbs (rather than a gallery) so the image can get prominence? GARDEN 21:52, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Interesting pattern and good resolution, but as one who's seen many fractal pics, this one doesn't have the wow I'd expect for a fractal FP. Sasata (talk) 03:02, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Mbz1 (talk) 17:08, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support either. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 21:58, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Per Sasata, I don't think it's quite there.--HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 22:10, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No consensus MER-C 02:15, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]