Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Woman beggar.jpg

File:Woman beggar.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2010 at 21:42:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Woman beggar.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Woman beggar.jpg

•  Info created, uploaded, nominated by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 21:42, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 21:42, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Strong support Technical quality is superb and the subject/composition is highly evocative. Steven Walling 21:55, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment There seems to be a bright red pixel low on her shawl, which I've indicated with a note. --Avenue (talk) 00:33, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

•  Comment Thanks! I will check the area in other pictures to determine whether or not it is the camera. --200.95.162.199 03:50, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

•  Oppose noisy, and imho composition isn't featured too --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 09:49, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose - A lot of value for me, just before I opened the picture in full size and started to pay attention to detail. A nice composition and theme indeed. Almost too nice, as the posture looks like a pose, the clothes are new and the hand and nails appear clean and neat. I say 'appear' instaed of 'are' because the noise and artifacts are so high that destroy most of the detail. Since it is unlikley that a ISO of only 400 in this excellent camera has produced such a disastrous image one can only conclude that this is the result of a clumsy post-processing. A shame. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 10:20, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
  •  Comment LOL!!! LMAO!!! It is beyond me to actually try to imagine how you must be if you actually think this little discourse of yours will pass as anything but as a very bad joke. It is so bad that it makes the situation really funny!!! You really made my day! Thanks! LOL!!! --Tomascastelazo (talk) 03:19, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
• Technical quality is not superb at all. But the composition is nice, and you should take into account that this is a 14MP image and not the usual downscaled bullshit.  Support --Dschwen (talk) 16:11, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support great picture --Simonizer (talk) 21:13, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Very nice capture --Lawboy25 (talk) 21:32, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose - Composition, distracting blurred elements at left. Jonathunder (talk) 14:35, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment - I understand it is a generic image, but would be interested to have more info in the description, such as in which city/country was this taken. --Elekhh (talk) 01:17, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

•  Comment Info added to description... photo taken in the city of Guanajuato, Mexico.

• Thanks.  Support. --Elekhh (talk) 23:58, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

•  Support Covering that red pixle would be good. --Mile (talk) 13:52, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

•  Comment red pixel covered... --Tomascastelazo (talk) 15:10, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

•  Support nice Amada44 (talk) 06:37, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support wow what a photo. I agree quality is not the best but the composition is too strong for an oppose. --AngMoKio (talk) 07:38, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose - too much noise.--Avala (talk) 12:28, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Votes like this are hurting the project. This attitude just drives users to upload downsampled crippleware pictures. See User:Stefan_Vladuck/Downsampling. --Dschwen (talk) 12:39, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Rastrojo _(D•ES) 15:50, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Very good photo. And one cannot have the same criteria as for photos of stones or trees. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 17:38, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Great. I think a crop at the left would make it even more simple and bleak looking. --99of9 (talk) 23:53, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose good enough pic, but doesn't 'wow' enough for featuring - MPF (talk) 10:40, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Nice composition. --Avenue (talk) 15:02, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Technically and composition-wise more or less ok, but not superb. The perfectly clean clothes, perfectly draped, in a perfectly clean setting do not convince me as an FP of a beggar. Sorry! --Pjt56 (talk) 16:21, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment Do beggars need to be dirty, in a dirty envirnoment and pictures uploaded with "scratch-n-sniff" effects? Beggars go to where potential customers are... tourist places, etc., that are generally clean. This other example was taken in the same general area #REDIRECT [[1]] He looks pretty clean too. Being clean, I think, is one attempt to maintain dignity. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 19:07, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support --ianaré (talk) 04:55, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support -- Albertus teolog (talk) 21:52, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:48, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People