Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/New York City Subway Vernon Boulevard-Jackson Avenue

New York City Subway Vernon Boulevard-Jackson Avenue[edit]

Reason: A good capture of a subway train leaving the station.
Articles this image appears in: Vernon Boulevard–Jackson Avenue (IRT Flushing Line), New York
Creator: Dschwen

Support as nominator --Shappy ^talk 14:48, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good motion shot under difficult lighting conditions. Durova²⁸⁵ 15:22, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not enough EV, IMO --Muhammad(talk) 16:08, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I'm with Muhammad on this one. Dubious EV, also lots of purple fringing. I think that photographing the station without people is probably a better EV selection, but EV would be even better if the train weren't moving (so that it's possible to see what model of rail cars serves this station). Spikebrennan (talk) 16:26, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The car class is R62-R62A, identifiable because the station is part of the A Division as opposed to the B Division and the car has a distinguishable exterior. The differences between the two types are different manufacturers and interior coverings (I think); the exteriors look identical to the untrained eye, such as I. Tinlinkin (talk) 09:19, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per lack of EV. IMO it would have much better EV if the train wasn't moving, hence it is a station where trains are supposed to be stationed. Zoo Fari 18:27, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per everything above. Lacking EV, odd photographic choices, etc. Staxringold _talk^contribs 19:15, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I approve of the train movement - adds to the appeal of the image, and focuses on the *station* rather than the *train*. A subway station is a hard object to get "EV" from - they all look pretty much the same - is there anything in this shot (other than the signs) that distinguishes this station from any other? It's also obviously hard to get more than a single platform or a single part of the concourse in a shot. I could almost be talked into supporting this, but the shot seems pretty easily reproduceable. Avoiding purple fringing in this kind of shot seems pretty tough though - you either need a better camera or to postprocess it. Stevage 03:17, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They all look the same? You'd be surprised...Shappy ^talk 17:13, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Probably as good as you can really get from a New York subway station, but it's a pretty cramped view and they all look fairly drab and anonymous, so EV is a bit limited. I added a photo of a London tube station for comparison. I think it has a more dynamic composition and has more EV but obviously it's comparing apples and oranges. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 07:28, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Mind the gap wadester 16 16:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Oh I do. On a daily basis. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 17:27, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
support This picture has EV for sure: the typical architectural construction of the tube in NYC is visible here. The composition is nice. – Wladyslaw (talk) 07:51, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Used in the article on the station - just because the station doesn't have a dramatic staircase view doesnt' mean it shouldn't be promoted. Shoemaker's Holiday ^{Over 184 FCs served} 16:25, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support The station itself is made apparent and I thoroughly enjoy the moving train. I really don't care what subway this represents; I just think this is pretty good in general. NYC has a certain charm to it with its steel columns (which are rare elsewhere → goes with the era and location: most structural columns like these are reinforced concrete; note the Tube and the Moscow Metro). wadester 16 07:08, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
comment While it's near imposible to avoid when dealing with pics of underground stations image has noise issues.©Geni 15:58, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Wadester. Worth pointing out the big purple smudge on the train door is probably some graphics or other, while the fringing around the lights is kind of forgivable in this situation. I'm weak supporting for the good illustration of a fairly typical NY subway but it does lack a really compelling element somewhere. --mikaul^talk 09:56, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The Purple thing on the train window is the decal showing those on the platform what route it runs. Shappy ^talk 20:25, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Very nice composition, though I am not impressed with the quality, and the purple fringing is quite prevalent around the lights. -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 17:36, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Quality concerns (esp. purple fringing) and questionable EV add up to an oppose. Makeemlighter (talk) 01:58, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment In doing a rearrangement of images at New York, I felt this was good for the transportation section, so that's another article this image can be found in. wadester 16 07:28, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I am likely biased because I am a frequent user of the New York City Subway (as well as that being the focus of my Wiki editing lately). To respond to some concerns, the "purple fringing" denotes the designation of the IRT Flushing Line in the NYCS, which, in turn, determines the color of the 7 (see New York City Subway nomenclature for a detailed explanation). If the train is moving, the fringing is unlikely to be avoided because that "bullet" is lighted from within the train car. (If the train was the focus, then the station would have the fringing.) As for the EV, it's pretty much a typical station, although a picture that included top border mosaics, station identification mosaics or signage is probably better, i.e. New York City Subway tiles, because that is a better representation of NYCS architecture and design. (Suggestion: try the same angle from an island platform that shows the outside wall, columns, and moving train, such as Court Street or Clark Street. The angle may have to be wider as in this shot of DeKalb Avenue.) So I have to agree with not enough EV. Tinlinkin (talk) 09:19, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Just a FYI - I agree with much of what you say, but the purple fringing that people are talking about is not the purple subway sign - it's a lens/sensor artifact where there is a purple 'bleed' around areas of strong light/contrast. You can see it in the fluorescent lighting above the train. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 17:30, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I've been waiting to be sure before voting and it's a definite no for me. Whenever i look at the picture, even the far away parts of the station, my eyes are drawn back to the blurred part on the left and that kills it for me. Moreover, i find that EV would have been better with at least a distinguishable train. The London picture is spot on regarding that. With trains and passengers, i get what this is all about. Ksempac (talk) 23:03, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --Shoemaker's Holiday ^{Over 184 FCs served} 00:35, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticing this now. Thanks for the supports! And thanks for taking time to opposes as well ;-). This image is old. I shot it with a Powershot G3 3.5 years ago. Technically not FP material. Surprised to see this over here. Anyhow. I love subways, and taking photos in NY is always fun. I have tons of similar pictures, some from last year with my 5D. --Dschwen 22:40, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]