Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Cone Nebula (NGC 2264) Star-Forming Pillar of Gas and Dust.jpg

#1	#2 200px\|Cone Nebula
#3 200px	#4

Info ~~created by NASA, ESA, and C.R. O'Dell (Vanderbilt University)~~ NASA, H. Ford (JHU), G. Illingworth (UCSC/LO), M.Clampin (STScI), G. Hartig (STScI), the ACS Science Team, and ESA - originally uploaded by ~~en:Lars_Lindberg_Christensen Lars Lindberg Christensen~~ The Photographer - nominated by The Photographer 00:45, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Info corrected; discussion moved to talk page. ~ trialsanderrors 18:11, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support ~ The Photographer 00:45, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Jtico 01:25, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral The image is nice, but hubblesite jpgs tend to of low quality, so this should be converted from the tiff file. ~ trialsanderrors 04:05, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- an tiff image exists but it is of 250 MB --The Photographer 12:44, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - I know. It's a pain to download them but sadly it's often necessary to get the best quality pictures. ~ trialsanderrors 18:11, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - 250 MB ? The tiff I downloaded was only 28.67 MB. And in that you can clearly see the better quality. /Daniel78 19:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose rather grainy Lycaon 13:15, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tiff is about just as grainy :-( Lycaon 22:59, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Jpeg artifacts compared to the tiff, this is supposed to be the best images on wikipedia so when we have a better source we should use it. /Daniel78 19:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Just uploaded a jpeg which I converted from the 28MB tiff. --Bricktop 20:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment You don't need to convert astrological tiffs at full quality. Usually 8/10 or 9/12 is enough to avoid jpg artifacts even at enlarged viewing. In this case since the image has very little detail and a lot of grain downsampling might be a better option. ~ trialsanderrors 23:12, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Packa 21:44, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 08:08, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support I uploaded a best from the tiff image --The Photographer 20:50, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 13:22, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support I like the colours --Simonizer 10:06, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The image is blurry --The Photographer 14:11, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 13:22, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support Noise removed without doing it too much. I also tried to downsample it, but it doesn't make a difference. So I prefer keeping it big for printing reasons. --Arad 18:02, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support This seem to be the best one. /Daniel78 20:04, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 07:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]