Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Boxing080905 photoshop.jpg

Professional boxing bout




This is an image I found in the US Marine Corps image archive. Although it might not fulfill all technical specifications, I personally feel that it brings out the essence of focus and aggression in boxing, and contributes greatly to the article. The background and is very unusual for a boxing image, and atleast for me, it conveys an eerie feeling. I could imagine this one as a featured picture. -- M a r c u s      19:09, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Nominate and support ---Marcus- 10:24, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support edit - see below. Quite some action! One drawback, though: the cut-off head... --Janke | Talk 11:48, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The head is added in this other picture. Less authentic, naturally. Shawnc 12:19, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support special--K.C. Tang 14:13, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support I agree with the nomination, I think this is a great image with a lot of energy. Although the one boxer's head is cut off, I think the real focus of the image is on the boxer on the left, so I don't think it detracts from the image. &#126;MDD4696 15:54, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Symbol_support_vote.png|15px|Support]] Support I like the sky and angle of the image. True, the head that was cut off does take away from the image, but its worthy enough for a Featured Picture. Alvinrune TALK 02:42, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Support A great picture. Somewhat surreal, in a good way. --Lewk_of_Serthic contrib talk 03:56, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. Illustrates the subject quite well. --Red Penguin 08:00, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. - Mgm|(talk) 11:55, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support great illustration of its topic, and a compelling photo. I suspect the near boxer being slightly cut is a considered and deliberate part of the composition: it brings the viewer into the scene and gives the impression of sharing his (the near boxer's) viewpoint. If you could see the whole of him the choice of angle would just look weird. ~ Veledan • Talk 13:18, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
 * OK so I was wrong. That is one hell of a good fake, I'm impressed ~ Veledan • Talk 23:45, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral The picture is very dynamic and illustrative, but the right boxer's head is partly cut off and the lamps (ecpecially those between the two) are disturbing. Calderwood 14:58, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. I see no problem with the cut-off head. The left boxer and the background are both excellent. Kafziel 15:55, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support - first class - Adrian Pingstone 17:09, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support –Joke 17:41, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support - jolly good show.--Deglr6328 08:07, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support it will be a while before we see a better picture for Boxing. -- Solipsist 09:23, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. I also photoshopped the picture to address the cut-off issue, as seen here. Shawnc 12:19, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * That is amazingly well done! I would support it, provided the "edited image" tag is on the description page. Why don't you upload Heck, you're supposed to be bold, I uploaded the version here myself, so we'll be certain to have an animated discussion about image editing... ;-) --Janke | Talk 15:12, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * As suggested, the image has been re-tagged under the newly created PD-retouched-user (also available on Wikipedia). Thanks for everyone's comments too. Shawnc 23:14, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Absolutely stunning! Are you sure you didn't find a larger image somewhere? :) ---Marcus- 15:25, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Looks great! I don't know if it will really spark any debate about edited images... it's just the top of a crew cut and some lights, not like photoshopping John Lennon into a picture of Castro or something. At worst it's harmless, at best it makes the picture complete and perfect. Great job, Shawn! Kafziel 15:30, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * At worst, the image doesn't show off the boxer's awesome mohawk. &mdash; 0918 BRIAN &bull; 2006-03-9 03:38
 * Holy crap that's a good photoshop job. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 22:58, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support The second version. Staxringold 03:38, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support The second version. — Encephalon 11:14, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support The outdoor setting adds a very nice touch Tokugawapants 20:30, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support the 2nd version. &mdash; 0918 BRIAN &bull; 2006-03-9 03:36
 * supportBertilvidet 15:50, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 * support second one. --Tone 16:07, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support the 2nd version. Good one! - Mailer Diablo 20:04, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support the second version is intense! Canuck89 01:44, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support love the evening sky. The Tom 05:43, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose second photo. Voting after the fact and after Shawnc pointed me to this discussion. Altered photos are in violation of the WP:NOR policy and should not be used to illustrate articles in the main Wikipedia namespace, let alone be promoted to Featured status. The reason is that they purport to illustrate something that is not true; they show a moment in time that never occurred. That is certainly a beautiful photo and I'd support the first one as Featured. Tempshill 06:21, 7 June 2006 (UTC)