Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Checker Taxi Cab.jpg

File:Checker Taxi Cab.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2018 at 06:10:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Checker Taxi Cab.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Checker Taxi Cab.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles
•  Info created by Adrian Nier - uploaded by Pilettes - nominated by Groupir ! -- Groupir ! (talk) 06:10, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
•  Support -- Groupir ! (talk) 06:10, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
•  Oppose - Dull light, and secondarily, the way you munged the license plate number is distracting. Not sure why that would be necessary. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:13, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

@Ikan Kekek: I didn't retouch this photo. - Groupir ! (talk) 15:41, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Of course my remarks are for the photographer. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:39, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

•  Oppose Too dark, bad light. Yann (talk) 08:18, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
•  Oppose per others.--Peulle (talk) 09:19, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
•  Oppose per others. --Basotxerri (talk) 15:31, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
•  Info Groupir !, Ikan Kekek, Yann, Peulle, Basotxerri: I like old cars like this so I gave the photo a bit of love, please revert it if you don't like it. The source link doesn't work anymore and it seems to be removed from Flickr. All the online versions have the same muddled license plate, so it was probably made that way by the author. I substituted it with a more natural-looking text. I also wanted to keep as much of the bluish evening light as possible since it goes well with an old cab like this. Not sure it is enough for FP, but this is as good as it gets. --Cart (talk) 19:33, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

•  Support Sure! Good now. Yann (talk) 19:52, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

•  Comment Still at 'no' here. The level of sharpness is not high enough; it's kind of telling that the "checker" sign is unsharp too, despite the image being one of a checker cab.--Peulle (talk) 22:22, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
•  Oppose The brightness is good now, but I'm with Peulle that it's not sharp enough for FP. And I don't even mean the depth of field, I'm not sure any part of the cab is actually sharp. -- KTC (talk) 23:31, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
•  Comment - It looks a lot better, but I agree with the others that it probably needs more sharpness. I don't know if that's possible. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:11, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

• Nope, sorry, post-processing can only do so much. If it's not there from the beginning, you can't get it out. --Cart (talk) 08:46, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

•  Oppose Even putting the unsharpness and CA in the background aside, this is just too static a composition to be an FP for me. Daniel Case (talk) 03:51, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 07:33, 23 June 2018 (UTC)