Commons:Featured picture candidates/Schmiedefeuer 2.jpg

File:Schmiedefeuer 2.jpg, not featured

Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2009 at 23:28:25

•  Info created by Metoc - uploaded by Metoc - nominated by Robert of Ramsor -- Robert of Ramsor (talk) 23:28, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Support -- I found this in the forge article, which I had linked from Black Country Living Museum. I don't know if this has been nominated before for Featured Picture, but I think it should be. It has a real sense of drama and activity. For this reason, I plead that there is a mitigating circumstance to relax the 2M pixel rule. It does not seem to matter in this picture. Or substitute Schmiedefeuer.jpg which does meet the 2M pixel rule. Robert of Ramsor (talk) 23:28, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Comment Size limit does not apply here. The image is over 3Mpx (3,096,768px). Lycaon (talk) 00:34, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

My mistake. I saw "1.9M" on the file for this picture, and did not think to calculate the pixels from the other information. Past time I was asleep! Robert of Ramsor (talk) 00:58, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

•  Support Very nice! --Musia! (talk) 19:03, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Support--Umnik (talk) 11:34, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Do you see the red band in the middle, too? --SvonHalenbach (talk) 18:34, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Heavy artefacts on the black cover. Tilt is a bit annoying causing a unfortunate viewing direction. The remains of the red wall in the background is disturbing --Richard Bartz (talk) 21:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Comment The features which SvonHalenbach and Richard Bartz have identified appear to be part of the normal structure and construction of a commercial forge. Since this is essentially a picture of a flame, and a flame is not an opaque object like almost everything else which we photograph, it is inevitable that anything the far side of the flame will be visible. In this case, the flame is less that of a bonfire, and substantially the stream of sparks blown up from the air flow through the coke. If the forge pictured here had been totally open, you would then have seen some other background which may have been merely the far side of the room, or something more distracting still. I do agree about the picture not being straight. Can Metoc produce a second version by rotating it a few degrees anticlockwise? But the sense of drama here makes that less of a fault than it would be for a building. -- Robert of Ramsor (talk) 01:28, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Great! -- Crapload (talk) 21:51, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per Richard Bartz --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 20:49, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Ö 10:47, 27 January 2009 (UTC)