Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Burrard Street Bridge

Burrard Street Bridge

Reason

Self-nom. An picture from a photo session. I'm quite proud of the outcome of the pictures. The color is balanced, is free of image noise, and it illustrates the bridge well.

Articles this image appears in

Burrard Street Bridge

Creator

Selmo

Nominator

-- Selmo ^(talk)

• Support — -- Selmo ^(talk) 02:04, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Massive Artifacts, tilted... -Fcb981 02:56, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• oppose artifacts probably make it unfixable. Debivort 03:51, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any ideas on how to do this (in photoshop?) worth a try. -- Selmo ^(talk) 03:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• well maybe, if you have an uncompressed version there is hope. Not with editing but I bet you handled the file incorrectly. Basicaly you need to save that origenal at a much higher Jpg quality level. It dependes what kind of programs you are using to import the files from your camera etc. Most generic importers don't compress this badly so my guess at how it happened would be when you went to edit it with photoshop you saved the edit badly??? if that happend and you did the 'save as' feature you may have picked a Jpg quality setting way below what is Ideal. -Fcb981 04:37, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• I think its completely unsalvagable to be honest. Looks like extreme(ly poor) noise reduction or something. It was taken at ISO 100 so the noise shouldn't have been that bad, but it was taken with an HP camera. HP have never had a good reputation with digital cameras. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 23:57, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. As above. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 23:57, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose, recommend withdrawal.
  Noclip 17:22, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Withdrawal policy is not formalized as far as I know, and I see no great reason to withdraw any image - would it just be to save on download time of this page? I say let the nominations proceed through the full protocol. A lot of nominations that have had little chance of success have generated helpful comments for the nominators and otherwise helpful positive discussions. Debivort 18:52, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• I'd like to think that would be the case, but FPC is pretty brutal of late and I suspect what it would actually generate is sarcastic/disparaging remarks, neither of which are helping either the contributor or Wikipedia. Perhaps everybody would like to prove me wrong? ;-) --YFB ¿ 00:49, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• You're right, FPC can be a bit like running the gauntlet sometimes, but lets face it, some images are clearly very flawed and it is a bit frustrating to see them appear on FPC when WIAFP guidelines (and I would have thought common sense) justifies pretty clearly what is expected. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 01:09, 18 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

• Totally true, but that doesn't justify a lot of the
  biting that we see here. No suggestion that you're guilty of that, by the way - your comments above are constructive. I was really just agreeing with Noclip that withdrawal might be easier on the nominator's feelings. --YFB ¿ 02:45, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Withdrawal is not easier for nominator's feeling. It'll just make him more disappointed. We have to incourage people to make more effort and create better works. And ofcourse give them positive comments and edits. Many of the images I nominated on FPC didn't pass, but I got out of them, some edits from talented users who helped the image quality a lot and made some of them actually Quality Image on commons. We're here to help not to withdraw. --Arad 06:34, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose With all due respect to the creator, my old junky camera made by "DSC" could have taken a better shot, and the outcome looks like it was put through one of the "artistic" filters in Photoshop. Editing the picture to make it more yellow does not make it better. Keep trying though. :) vLaDsINgEr 23:50, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't see any evidence of filtering and what was useful about saying that your old camera could have taken a better shot. There wasn't anything productive in your comment and all it served to do was put down the nominator. -Fcb981 00:13, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --KFP (talk | contribs) 22:28, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]