Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Royal Marines helicopter underslinging a watercraft

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 May 2014 at 07:29:04 (UTC)

Original – A United Kingdom Royal Marines Chinook helicopter underslinging a Rigid-hulled inflatable boat.
Reason
This is an informative, encyclopedic illustration with colorful aesthetic quality of a "daring" insertion and extraction procedure.
Articles in which this image appears
Royal Marines, Rigid-hulled inflatable boat, Boeing Chinook (UK variants)
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Water or Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Air
Creator
"LA PHOT HAMISH BURKE" / Royal Navy
Rather off-topic, but that pic (showing a piston-engine Spitfire) is a poor choice for the hot start article, which deals entirely with turboprop and jet engines. Sca (talk) 21:46, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's probably more of an issue that the article needs expanding into a wider discussion of the different uses of "hot start". -- (talk) 23:08, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose... In addition to the other above reasons for opposition, the image quality itself is poor and the image has clearly been 'enhanced' with a saturation boost. It may have been a technically challenging shot but it's been ruined by fiddling after the event. Featured Pictures should be documentary quality, with the accuracy and integrity that is associated with it. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 10:22, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Out of interest, what test are you using to check for saturation changes? I can find no record of it. -- (talk) 11:23, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Open the image in a photo editor and look at the RGB Histogram. He's right. Adding that bit of drama is probably OK for Commons but here not so much. Saffron Blaze (talk) 18:51, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Even without looking at the RGB histogram, I've seen enough photos of sunsets to know what kind of colours and saturation the sky gets. Also, the edges have been 'sharpened' and there is an unpleasant halo around them. It actually seems to have been upsampled too, possibly because this isn't the original framing and it was cropped and enlarged to reach MoD's image resolution specifications. Just guesswork on my part. If so though, it would explain the particularly obvious sharpening and softness. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 07:39, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It would be useful to have a page of recommended tests for nominators to consider before putting an image forward to FPC. I would expect the photograph was cropped, indeed I gave it a slight rotational correction after this was requested on Commons which itself required a minor crop. As for the other points, it is not possible to prove a negative and as I was not the photographer (nor even the nominator here), I cannot provide any assurance otherwise. -- (talk) 08:14, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Sven Manguard Wha? 01:35, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]