I'm not the originator of this image, I happened to come across it in the Dollar article, and found it striking and appropriate.

• Nominate and support. - Fieari 19:40, 28 March 2006 (UTC) reply
• Oppose Highlights blown out, only center in focus- (Why is that "3" so important? ;-) Sure, this is a good way of circumventing the restrictions of imaging currency, but that alone doesn't make it a FP. -- Janke | Talk 19:47, 28 March 2006 (UTC) reply
• Oppose. Artsy, low DOF, not particularly encyclopedic. -- Dschwen 20:20, 28 March 2006 (UTC) reply
• Oppose .... its just too.... crappy? is that a valid reason for oppose? 'Not pleaseing' If it's not valid. - M ^ask 20:38, 28 March 2006 (UTC) reply
• Oppose due to angle, I'd be much more inclined to support if it were a straight-on closeup shot. Pegasus1138 ^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 20:46, 28 March 2006 (UTC) reply
• Oppose per Mask... :/ The government images on United States one-dollar bill are just better IMO. Staxringold 21:21, 28 March 2006 (UTC) reply
• Oppose. Agree with above. Alr 23:20, 28 March 2006 (UTC) reply
• Oppose per above. Artsy to the point that its encyclopedic value suffers. bcasterline t 23:43, 28 March 2006 (UTC) reply
• Oppose The subject has potential, but it simply must be possible to find a better quality image. -- Philopedia 01:34, 29 March 2006 (UTC) reply
• Oppose The dollar bill needs more green in it. The green has alot to do with the history of the United States fiat currency system. -- Mushroom King 09:14, 29 March 2006 (UTC) reply
• Oppose per philopedia. Procrastinator-General 23:48, 29 March 2006 (UTC) reply
• Oppose A great early April Fool joke - Adrian Pingstone 17:51, 30 March 2006 (UTC) reply
• Oppose. washed out. psch e mp | talk 06:02, 2 April 2006 (UTC) reply
• Oppose per above. -- King of Hearts ^talk 01:14, 6 April 2006 (UTC) reply

Not promoted by nominator via the snowball clause.