Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sarychev Peak.jpg

File:Sarychev Peak.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2010 at 19:01:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by NASA - edited, uploaded and nominated by -- The High Fin Sperm Whale 19:01, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support I know the quality is poor, but this is a special picture of a very rare event. -- The High Fin Sperm Whale 19:01, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose (formerly FPX) Image does not fall within the guidelines, Poor Quality Thomas888b (talk) 19:10, 25 October 2010 (GMT)(Updated 10:28, 01 November 2010 (GMT))
I'm not sure there can be any exeptions to the poor quality rule really. -- Thomas888b (talk) 19:10, 25 October 2010 (GMT)
- Support I actually support this because I find it interesting too. --IdLoveOne (talk) 20:18, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Derivative of File:Sarychev Peak Volcano erupts on Matua Island.jpg; it is not clear to me what was done to it, except increasing the file size. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 06:21, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the saturation was reduced. --99of9 (talk) 11:06, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That should not need to triple the file size, I think. This is the fifth version of the same photo in Category:Sarychev Peak. What is the use? /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 15:58, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I tripled the size? And noty all of them in the category are variations of each other. this and this are both separate from this photo. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 17:02, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They are all the same, except for rotation; you made a 2 Mb file out of 0.6 Mb. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 05:52, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support per The High Fin Sperm Whale. Awesome capture! LeavXC (talk) 13:02, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice Pic Thomas888b (talk) 15:23, 26 October 2010 (GMT)

~~Your second vote - what will it be? /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 15:58, 26 October 2010 (UTC)~~[reply]

Support –hover Fly | chat? 19:12, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Lošmi (talk) 21:48, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thank you for nomination.--Mbz1 (talk) 01:47, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great!! --Karelj (talk) 16:54, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cephas (talk) 22:01, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support as The High Fin Sperm Whale Athyllis (talk) 23:06, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ggia (talk) 10:48, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 12:59, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rare --George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:37, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:53, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Despite the obvious quality issues, mitigated by the high EV and beauty. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 18:42, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Albertus teolog (talk) 01:04, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, overprocessed, unnecessarily poor quality. The original image from NASA has some noise, but it's not nearly as apparent as it is here. And I'm not meaning to imply High Fin Sperm Whale did anything underhand here, but if this does pass, I think the uploader of that image (TonyBallioni) deserves some credit too. This would set a bad precedent otherwise. --Avenue (talk) 09:36, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The nominator accepted poor quality, but it is a rare occasion, and common sence say that it should be allowed. Thomas888b (talk) 21:09, 1 November 2010 (GMT)
  - My point was that we could easily produce a somewhat better quality image by starting with NASA's image, instead of the version from Flickr; i.e. that the quality is poorer than it needs to be. I agree that we can accept lower quality than usual given the rare circumstances, but not that we should accept lower quality than can easily be achieved. --Avenue (talk) 22:13, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Question Are you going to make it better then? --Thomas888b (talk) 10:25, 2 November 2010 (GMT)
      - Well, there's no obligation for a reviewer to do so, and I think the issue should be pretty clear anyway. But I had started doing so before your query, and I've finally avoided distractions long enough to get something sorted out. Here's my version: File:Sarychev Volcano edit.jpg. I'm sure others here would do it differently, and probably better, but I think this is an improvement on the nominated version, most clearly in the sea to the left of the eruption column. --Avenue (talk) 14:08, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      - There is no reason to reward a bloated file after substandard processing with featured image status. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 10:34, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:54, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural_phenomena