Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Short finals to RW22R at NCE Airport.jpg

File:Short finals to RW22R at NCE Airport.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2013 at 22:46:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Olivier Cleynen - uploaded by Olivier Cleynen - nominated by Pine -- Pine^✉ 22:46, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pine^✉ 22:46, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Suid-Afrikaanse (talk) 23:16, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very cool! Michael Barera (talk) 01:22, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Severely overexposed. Plus I don't like the tilt, even if it is on purpose. Also strong distortions. Yann (talk) 06:04, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think there is a tilt, or is there? The horizon is (about) horizontal. --Julian H. (talk/files) 09:11, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Great subject, composition and everything, but the image quality, sadly, is too low, with heavily clipped whites, strong color fringing/CAs, heavy noise and low overall sharpness. --Julian H. (talk/files) 09:11, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. Tomer T (talk) 13:35, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose bad quality. --SteGrifo27 (tell me) 23:53, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Definitely has the wow-factor for me. MartinD (talk) 20:21, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Overexposed on the outside and rather underexposed plus a lot of noise on the inside. It is of course difficult to get good lighting inside and outside the cockpit, but it is not impossible. --El Grafo (talk) 12:59, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Your examples use fill flash and extensive Photoshopping. Is there any room in Featured Pictures for images that are not heavily manipulated? Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 10:23, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I also notice an opposite standard adopted in animal photos. Extensive fill flash is universally condemned as unnatural. So humans in an unnatural environment require unnatural lighting to meet FP standards, while animals in a natural environment require natural lighting? Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 10:34, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  I don't see overexposure as the main problem here, that alone - if unavoidable - would be ok. Although it could be avoided in a dawn/dusk situation. The problem here is very bad quality which could be fixed with slight (non-manipulative) raw editing and a better camera. --Julian H. (talk/files) 13:15, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose poor lighting and chromatic aberrations everywhere. --99of9 (talk) 10:11, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above --Stas1995 (talk) 08:12, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:32, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]