Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:MAX Blue Line to Gresham on Jefferson St.jpg

File:MAX Blue Line to Gresham on Jefferson St.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Mar 2010 at 00:31:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:MAX Blue Line to Gresham on Jefferson St.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:MAX Blue Line to Gresham on Jefferson St.jpg

•  Info created by Ian Sane - uploaded by Steven Walling - nominated by Steven Walling -- Steven Walling 00:31, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
•  Support -- Steven Walling 00:31, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose BW without good reason loses information. I don't see good reason here. --99of9 (talk) 13:42, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Trams are often recognized by their colours. Snowmanradio (talk) 16:12, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment Didn't know B&W itself was an oppose reasoning. You do realize it identifies what train it is by the giant board that says its destination, right? Steven Walling 18:52, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

• I expect that tram enthusiasts would like to see its colours. Snowmanradio (talk) 22:16, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

•  Support a fine photograph. It's odd to see how much times have changed. As recently as the mid-eighties the consensus among serious photographers was that black and white was preferable for artistic work. Durova (talk) 19:05, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Have you spent any time in a darkroom developing and enlarging b&w pictures? Well, I have, and let me tell you there are worlds between that and this phony black and white. --Dschwen (talk) 16:19, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Strangely I've just returned from a "monochrome" course. The genre is far from dead :) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 19:31, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
•  Support It's just fine composition with curve of railroad. And black-green-white color in my monitor... :) -- Andrew Krizhanovsky (talk) 20:06, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose. This doesn't have much in common with classical B&W. It is so much less to just desaturate a color pic. I don't like it. Artsy-*artsy at the expense of educational value. We should not throw COM:SCOPE out of the window for the effect. --Dschwen (talk) 20:59, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Oft ist aber das "wegnehmen" der Farbe ein gutes Mittel um etwas zu betonen. Hier z.b die Linienführung, die würde mit Farbe nicht so gut zur Geltung kommen --Simonizer (talk) 21:36, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Imperfect Google translation of the above: "Often taking away the color is a good way to emphasize something. Here, for instance, the lines that would come with color not so good for the scope." Steven Walling 03:33, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
    • Also, I think you're allowed to say artsy-fartsy Dschwen. ;) Steven Walling 03:35, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per others. —kallerna™ 10:45, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose I'd be fine with the b&w, but I don't like the choice of DoF, and it appears somewhat tilted to me. --Dori - Talk 03:32, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
•  Support --Aqwis (talk) 21:49, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose - distortion of perspective by 400 mm telelens; in reality, tracks must not be this curvy. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:28, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Uh..actually I've walked down that street, and the tracks are that curvy. It's in the middle of downtown Portland, and the track follows one of the oldest streets in the city. Steven Walling 22:07, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:04, 15 March 2010 (UTC)