Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Apr 2011 at 12:06:25 (UTC)
- Reason
- High quality image of a police motorcycle in action; while it's the Victoria (Australia) Police, these BMW motorbikes are widely used by police around the world. Pretty clearly shows all the special features of a police bike and rider (lights, sirens, antennas, things that go 'wooop') in a clean, unobstructed scene at the preferred angle for vehicles.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Police, Victoria Police, Types of motorcycles
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Land (?)
- Creator
- jjron
- Support as nominator -- jjron ( talk) 12:06, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
- Support Yaay you're back :) Good EV and quality. Slight motion blur on face but IMO it's not a big deal. Nice to see he's not wearing jeans ;-) -- Muhammad (talk) 13:58, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
- Hah. What a memory! (Or did you just happen to check the old motorbike nom?). :) -- jjron ( talk) 11:58, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
- Support per Muhammad. Jujutacular talk 14:28, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
OpposeSupport Background is far too blurred. Adabow ( talk · contribs) 10:30, 9 April 2011 (UTC)- Too blurred? I would say it is not blurred enough! -- Alvesgaspar ( talk) 14:35, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
- If you're referring to motion blur, I think this is desirable to show that the subject is moving. Jujutacular talk 18:26, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
- You want a sharp background? Why? What good would that do? How about
this- is the background too blurred there? Though I am undecided on this image, I can see that that is a really strange oppose; I hope that you will reconsider.
J Milburn (
talk)
18:39, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
- This is my first activity in FPC, and you can probably realise that I'm not too knowledgable about imagery. :-) The foreground is sufficiently sharp, so I suppose I'll support it.
Adabow (
talk ·
contribs)
19:51, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
- Well welcome to FPC! I suppose I've seen you around the wiki so much I assumed you've been here. You may find the FPC glossary helpful to get up to speed on the terms used here and qualities that we expect. Jujutacular talk 04:06, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
- This is my first activity in FPC, and you can probably realise that I'm not too knowledgable about imagery. :-) The foreground is sufficiently sharp, so I suppose I'll support it.
Adabow (
talk ·
contribs)
19:51, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
- Support background separation is a good thing. JJ Harrison ( talk) 23:20, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
- Weak support. Nice shot. I agree with Alvesgaspar ("it is not blurred enough"); it only appears as a blur, and the panning is not obvious, hence the weak. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:59, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Promoted File:Victorian Police Motorcycle, Geelong, Aust, jjron, 30.9.2010.jpg -- Makeemlighter ( talk) 15:35, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Apr 2011 at 12:06:25 (UTC)
- Reason
- High quality image of a police motorcycle in action; while it's the Victoria (Australia) Police, these BMW motorbikes are widely used by police around the world. Pretty clearly shows all the special features of a police bike and rider (lights, sirens, antennas, things that go 'wooop') in a clean, unobstructed scene at the preferred angle for vehicles.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Police, Victoria Police, Types of motorcycles
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Land (?)
- Creator
- jjron
- Support as nominator -- jjron ( talk) 12:06, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
- Support Yaay you're back :) Good EV and quality. Slight motion blur on face but IMO it's not a big deal. Nice to see he's not wearing jeans ;-) -- Muhammad (talk) 13:58, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
- Hah. What a memory! (Or did you just happen to check the old motorbike nom?). :) -- jjron ( talk) 11:58, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
- Support per Muhammad. Jujutacular talk 14:28, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
OpposeSupport Background is far too blurred. Adabow ( talk · contribs) 10:30, 9 April 2011 (UTC)- Too blurred? I would say it is not blurred enough! -- Alvesgaspar ( talk) 14:35, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
- If you're referring to motion blur, I think this is desirable to show that the subject is moving. Jujutacular talk 18:26, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
- You want a sharp background? Why? What good would that do? How about
this- is the background too blurred there? Though I am undecided on this image, I can see that that is a really strange oppose; I hope that you will reconsider.
J Milburn (
talk)
18:39, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
- This is my first activity in FPC, and you can probably realise that I'm not too knowledgable about imagery. :-) The foreground is sufficiently sharp, so I suppose I'll support it.
Adabow (
talk ·
contribs)
19:51, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
- Well welcome to FPC! I suppose I've seen you around the wiki so much I assumed you've been here. You may find the FPC glossary helpful to get up to speed on the terms used here and qualities that we expect. Jujutacular talk 04:06, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
- This is my first activity in FPC, and you can probably realise that I'm not too knowledgable about imagery. :-) The foreground is sufficiently sharp, so I suppose I'll support it.
Adabow (
talk ·
contribs)
19:51, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
- Support background separation is a good thing. JJ Harrison ( talk) 23:20, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
- Weak support. Nice shot. I agree with Alvesgaspar ("it is not blurred enough"); it only appears as a blur, and the panning is not obvious, hence the weak. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:59, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Promoted File:Victorian Police Motorcycle, Geelong, Aust, jjron, 30.9.2010.jpg -- Makeemlighter ( talk) 15:35, 17 April 2011 (UTC)