We had something a bit like this a while ago (the image server is running too slowly for me to find it at the mo), but there were some minor concerns over jpeg artifacts. This one by User:Haloeffect looks a little bit better and similarly illustrates a nicely dynamic subject at Fire-twirling.
- Nominate and support. - Solipsist 19:28, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
- Comment - It seems to be rather washed out, and the image noise and JPEG artifacting are noticable, so I've uploaded this edit. PiccoloNamek 22:27, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
- Oppose. Blurry. Enochlau 02:21, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
- Of course it's blurry. To get that size of trail you have to have a relatively long exposure, and in that time the man and probably the camera too will have moved slightly. I think the fact that the twirler isn't so well defined adds to it, because if he was sharp it would draw your attention towards him and away from the fire. — Vanderdecken ∫ ξ φ
- Support - you can't get perfect clarity and show those fire rings. Renata3 19:01, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
- ( + ) Support Looks fine to me. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 07:14, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
- Support the edited version. The blurring actually contributes to the pic, me thinks. -- anetode ╔╝ 08:25, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
- Support TomStar81 20:14, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
- User:Vanderdecken/Support. I agree with Anetode, very nice and adds to article. It's the second version for me. — Vanderdecken ∫ ξ φ 12:17, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
- Oppose. The fire could be sharper, and there's quite a lot of noise. I've taken better [1]. ed g2s • talk 20:49, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Support version 2. Comment: "I've taken better" - why don't you upload one, then? ;-) Seriously, a picture like this is often a lucky shot. This one could have been a little better by using a tripod, but is quite nice as is. -- Janke | Talk 14:04, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Promoted Image:AnnanStaff2-2.jpg
Raven4x4x
06:00, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
We had something a bit like this a while ago (the image server is running too slowly for me to find it at the mo), but there were some minor concerns over jpeg artifacts. This one by User:Haloeffect looks a little bit better and similarly illustrates a nicely dynamic subject at Fire-twirling.
- Nominate and support. - Solipsist 19:28, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
- Comment - It seems to be rather washed out, and the image noise and JPEG artifacting are noticable, so I've uploaded this edit. PiccoloNamek 22:27, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
- Oppose. Blurry. Enochlau 02:21, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
- Of course it's blurry. To get that size of trail you have to have a relatively long exposure, and in that time the man and probably the camera too will have moved slightly. I think the fact that the twirler isn't so well defined adds to it, because if he was sharp it would draw your attention towards him and away from the fire. — Vanderdecken ∫ ξ φ
- Support - you can't get perfect clarity and show those fire rings. Renata3 19:01, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
- ( + ) Support Looks fine to me. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 07:14, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
- Support the edited version. The blurring actually contributes to the pic, me thinks. -- anetode ╔╝ 08:25, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
- Support TomStar81 20:14, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
- User:Vanderdecken/Support. I agree with Anetode, very nice and adds to article. It's the second version for me. — Vanderdecken ∫ ξ φ 12:17, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
- Oppose. The fire could be sharper, and there's quite a lot of noise. I've taken better [1]. ed g2s • talk 20:49, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
- Support version 2. Comment: "I've taken better" - why don't you upload one, then? ;-) Seriously, a picture like this is often a lucky shot. This one could have been a little better by using a tripod, but is quite nice as is. -- Janke | Talk 14:04, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Promoted Image:AnnanStaff2-2.jpg
Raven4x4x
06:00, 29 November 2005 (UTC)