Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Ryan Valentine scores.jpg

Image:Ryan Valentine scores.jpg, featured

•  Info created by Markbarnes - uploaded by Markbarnes - nominated by Responsible? --Responsible? 01:36, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Support I don't see many sporting images featured on Commons, but this one stood out for me for its importance (Wrexham scoring a goal against Boston United last month, in a game in which the loser would be relegated from the English Football League) and quality (most of the hundreds of fans can be seen clearly on the full-resolution version). It even captures the moment between ball-hitting-net and fans cheering... I'd be interested to hear what you think. --Responsible? 01:36, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Can't argue with any of that. Ben Aveling 01:45, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Support A lot of interesting details on this picture.What a gallery of face expressions! A good alternative to insects...Vassil 9 June 2007
• Strong  Support per Vassil. Majorly (talk) 08:48, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Support I join the gaping audience! --LucaG 16:59, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose Until it is downsampled because of noise from the high ISO. --Digon3 18:18, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose I agree this is a refreshing subject and a nice composition. But there is still some homework to do before the picture's quality satisfies. Alvesgaspar 12:40, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
  •  Question What do you want to see done? Ben Aveling 22:13, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
  •  Comment - Well, I quite agree with Digon3 that a downsample might improve the picture (I know that is considered as a serious sin by some users), as well as the application of some de-noise filter. Alvesgaspar 22:33, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
    • Most cameras has a built in noise filter and a sharpen filter, why should it being a sin to apply this external instead by the camera? --Makro Freak 08:17, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
    • I was talking about the sinful practise of downsampling as a method to improve sharpness and reduce noise Alvesgaspar 08:23, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
      •  Comment Downsampling is ok when images don't have enough resolution anyway. For example, an image with 4MP of real resolution downsampled from 8MP to 6MP doesn't lose much if the downsampling algorithm is half decent, but it does remove noise and improve sharpness at 100%. In cases like that, downsampling is optional, and I consider it more of a minor sin. --Ram-Man 12:29, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
        • No, you wrote (quote: Alvesgaspar "as well as the application of some de-noise filter"). I cant understand that, we should support every enhancement of quality any which way. --Makro Freak 16:08, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Question This is a great picture! I would immediately support it for nomination if I had not serious doubts concerning copyright violations. Don't the people on the photo have to agree to be published?--Christoph Michels 09:44, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
  • They are in a public place so they don't have to give their permission. See Commons:Photographs_of_identifiable_people Jacopo 11:48, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
  •  Support You convinced me! Great picture! --Christoph Michels 12:46, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Support--Javier ME 15:18, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Support The noise is due to the ISO 800 setting, chosen probably because a fast very shutter speed is needed in sports photography. --MichaelMaggs 10:07, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

result: 8 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer 09:36, 19 June 2007 (UTC)