Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/SFO at night

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

SFO at night [edit]

San Francisco International Airport at night

I nominate this picture because it has already been awarded featured picture status on the commons. I also believe that this is a beautiful picture. This photo was taken by Andrew Choy

  • Nominate and support. - Sam916 05:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: This picture is beautiful with sharp contrast that reveal details in the dark - Falconsgladiator 09:43, 7 January 2006 (PST)
  • Comment: The colors are nice, but nothing appears to be in focus. Maybe I'm asking too much of a night-time photo :) — 0918BRIAN • 2006-01-8 06:36
  • Support - TomStar81 06:46, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral. Nice when viewed as a thumbnail, but as noted above, it seems a little too unclear and undetailed for me to support. enochlau (talk) 08:51, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Early on the standards for FP were somewhat lower than they are now (not in 'theory' but in practice yes)[1], [2] and this image would've probably been adequate, but lately the quality of images here has risen so high that for beter or worse, I think the standard for acceptance has changed as well. This is a nice idea for a photo but the focus is unfortunately really rather poor, at 1/50th second exposure there is no reason it should be if focus was properly manually set to . I can't support it for FP. --Deglr6328 09:48, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Below standard FPs can be unfeatured. And the Yarra pic definately should. It's not eligible anymore anyhow sice it is not used in any article.--Dschwen 11:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sadly, and very reluctantly User:Vanderdecken/Oppose. Lovely image, very nice at thumbnail, but at full size it just can't be an FP. Sorry. —Vanderdecken∴∫ξφ 11:13, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I like it, but it appears that the other Wikipedians don't. Tell me, if that a motorway [highway] going into the airport? --Kilo-Lima 12:37, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • No, it's the main road connecting the terminals and parking garages with US Highway 101. It goes under the international terminal (that's the silver box with the slatted roof) and into the toroidal parking structure (all the area between the terminals) and the pick-up/drop-off points for each terminal. Here is a google map. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:45, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, maybe it's just me but even at full size, it appears focused and clear. Excellent idea for an image. Francisco International Airport at night.jpg Full size.
  • Support. I think it's good. Reason for unsharpness IMO can be also in movement of plane with photographer. If you think it's unsharp, I've tried simple sharpening filter + downscaling
    File:SFO at night downres.jpg
    Filter + scaled to 1300x866
    , so you would have to oppose on base of low resoltuion :) ...IMO with more advanced processing sharper image can be optained even at full resolution: a quest for Gimp/Photoshop/... wizards :) --Wikimol 20:47, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I know how difficult a night shot like this must be. As for the downscaling/sharpening. Forget it. You'll get no increase in information content only loss by fumbling with the picture. --Dschwen 07:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, I don't see anything wrong with the original image. The downscaled image was only smaller and I saw no increase in sharpness. If we're going to have it, leave it at full size. -- Mgm|(talk) 08:41, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Unfortunately not very sharp at full res (either version). Camerafiend 22:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Weak Support
      of the edit. the first picture is very blurry. drumguy8800 - speak? 05:04, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, still it's whats in the image that counts. --Thorpe | talk 18:07, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. It's attractive, and it's representative of the subject. Moreover it passes a very important test for any featured-picture - if you'd never seen an airport (or this airport, indeed) does the article&picture tell you a lot more useful information than the article without the picture. This passes that test very well, I think. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:53, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, good picture of an airport shown from an interesting angle. Etnoy 14:32, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Great photo --Fir0002 02:06, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Striking, educational figure. --Jweed 21:24, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Nice shot. --Darwinek 23:09, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support second. Flcelloguy (A note?) 23:16, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support either version. An excellent job of showing (or rather, being) the big picture. Tosta Dojen 03:16, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose noisy and horrible JPEG artifacts. chowells 00:58, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Well-taken, and I didn't notice any noise or artifacts. Also, doesn't this look just like Midgar from FFVII?PiccoloNamek 22:13, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Oh, wie schön! (BEAUTIFUL!!!) Palm_Dogg 08:28, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Amazing Eteru 15:20, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:San Francisco International Airport at night.jpg Raven4x4x 09:17, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/SFO_at_night&oldid=1144847765"