Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:DTM Mercedes W204 DiResta09 amk.jpg

File:DTM Mercedes W204 DiResta09 amk.jpg, featured

Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2009 at 22:52:12

•  Info created, uploaded and nominated by AngMoKio -- AngMoKio (talk) 22:52, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
•  Support This is my best panning shot I guess (exposure: 1/80s). The picture shows the 2009 DTM-Mercedes driven by Paul di Resta on the Hockenheimring. -- AngMoKio (talk) 22:52, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Karel (talk) 08:17, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
•  Support -- Pro2 (talk) 11:48, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
•  Comment IMO there's too much of asphalt. New crop? —kallerna™ 12:52, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment. I wouldnt like to crop it as it adds to the panning effect. Is it really that bad? :) --AngMoKio (talk) 08:36, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

•  Question Is it allowed to show so much advertising in Wikimedia commons? I see here only an advertising campaign with many advertising messages on different advertising spaces. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 14:01, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Someone have to pay the bill for such an expensive sport :-)   • Richard • [®] • 14:54, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

•  Support   • Richard • [®] • 14:54, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Beautiful shot! →Diti the penguin — 15:25, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Tom dl (talk) 16:38, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --kaʁstn 16:55, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose I don't like the blurry background and the car itself has too much advertisement on it --Tired time (talk) 18:07, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Too much advertisement? Should the photographer go and remove the advertisment or what?! -- Pro2 (talk) 19:27, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

The photographer should not bring an image with advertisment into the Wikimedia commons. We need to avoid making plugs in the Wikimedia commons. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 22:38, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think that there mustn't be any advertisment visable in images. Haven't heard of such policy. I was talking more about aesthetics. Here advertisment is too distracting for me. For example here there are some ads, but when you look at the picture, you see a car. When I look at this picture, I find myself staring at letters "AMG". They are too big and right in the middle. No, I don't think advertisment should be removed, I just think that this image should not be featured and that nothing can be done about it.

It's a picture of a race car. Race cars have advertisements on them. So pictures of race cars should be ineligible for FP? How about a photo of a pro footballer. They have ads on their jerseys; should they be ineligible for FP also? Street photography often contains unavoidable billboards. Where do you draw the line? Cacophony (talk) 06:38, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

The blurry background is the thing about a panning shot. If you want the car and the background sharp you need a very short exposure. To make such a pic is no problem at all, much easier than this one, but the problem is that on such a pic it would look like as if the car would just park on the road. About the ads I can only say: Racing cars have ads, also the one you mentioned above. Furthermore this car is an AMG-car so in the end it is the brand of the car. --AngMoKio (talk) 08:36, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

•  Support Albertus teolog (talk) 20:28, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
•  Support /Daniel78 (talk) 09:17, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Kjetil_r 17:46, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
•  Support great panning shot --ianaré (talk) 23:25, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Lundalpd (talk) 23:28, 13 June 2009 (UTC) Discounted per Commons:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Rallyflee#Rallyflee. Lycaon (talk) 07:25, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Böhringer (talk) 19:46, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
•  Support. – Innv | d | s: 06:35, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Maedin\talk 09:10, 21 June 2009 (UTC)