Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Skydive runaway.jpg

File:Skydive runaway.jpg, not featured

Voting period ends on 19 Mar 2009 at 10:02:59

Info created, uploaded and nominated by User:Dmottl -- Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 10:02, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 10:02, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose photo "ok", but not spectacular... might of been better had the photo been a close-up taken just as the ~~planes~~ skydivers where braking formation... in a way that you can see the ~~planes~~ skydivers better and still see the smoke trails -- Dcubillas (talk) 16:00, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Sorry, I don't see any planes in this photo :) --Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 17:04, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment Some people don't even display the full-res picture before voting! :D →Diti the penguin — 17:34, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - Comment yeah, some people! :) ....... initially they looked like "planes" in the larger thumbnail (after seeing the full res photo, they obviously dont anymore)... but to have to see the full-res photo to make out what the black spots are (and to have to findout what the photo is about), to me, defeats the candidate. It was clear from the larger thumbnail (and the mistake) that the "subjects" where too small and I felt I didnt have to see the full-res image to make up my mind in this case. Reading the name would have been a nice hint though! sorry about that ---- so yes... I maintain my oppose -- Dcubillas (talk) 00:19, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Question Could you add english description? —kallerna™ 16:48, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support English description added. —kallerna™ 17:07, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Same thing as Tiago's comment below, I didn't know how to put it. →Diti the penguin — 17:34, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Your photo gets only interesting when magnification is used. Otherwise, it's hard to tell what the photo is about. Tiago Fioreze (talk) 19:05, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support These pictures are designed to be used at their full resolution. It's an exciting image. Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 00:18, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support "Hm, let's see what so special about those plains?" --> full size --> wow! --Lošmi (talk) 01:55, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Remarkably low noise, good composition, and clear details. Notyourbroom (talk) 05:06, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Poor details, completely devoid of wow. Lycaon (talk) 13:38, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Agree. Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:46, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 2 neutral => not featured. --Karel (talk) 18:00, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]