Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Moore tornado

2013 Moore tornado
Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2013  at 05:13:41 (UTC)


 * Reason:A very high EV image of the 2013 Moore tornado. Freely licensed (taken by me). Not perfect technical composition but high resolution (I will say, it's really hard to focus on the minor details of composition when there's an EF5 tornado nearby).
 * Articles in which this image appears:2013 Moore tornado, Tornado outbreak of May 18–21, 2013, Tornadoes of 2013, Moore, Oklahoma, Supercell
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena/Weather
 * Creator:Ks0stm


 * Support as nominator -- Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 05:13, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I should probably complain about the chromatic fringing, but, screw it. It's a picture of a highly notable tornado that's freely licensed. Support original. Adam Cuerden (talk) 05:55, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Support per Adam: this is a competently executed and dramatic photo of a notable topic with strong EV. Nick-D (talk) 10:27, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Question: How would everyone feel about a crop? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:58, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the general policy question, but if better pictures of a specific event exist "out there" (for example []) but not in wikicommons, should the lesser photograph still be promoted to featured article? And for the record support cropped Alt. Mattximus (talk) 19:51, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * As a general rule, remember we can only use free-licensed images here. If there's a better free-licensed image, that's a major problem. Now, i'm not an expert in tornado photography, but I'm going to guess that image you linked was likely taken with very high-speed film, since I wouldn't expect a tornado - by definition something made up of very fast-moving and thus fast-changing winds - to look that sharp without a very fast shutter speed. I may be wrong on that, but, if correct, this may well better depict what it would look like if you're there.
 * However, as I said, I'm not sure about any of that.
 * Now, what I can say is that the mere existence of a better photo Wikipedia can never use probably isn't a huge obstacle to FPC. Many pictures of celebrities we have at FP are great photos, but not as good as professional publicity shots, for insance. Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:17, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the excellent and timely reply, much appreciated! Mattximus (talk) 00:11, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree with what you said for the most part but with one note: How a tornado looks in a photograph can vary greatly based upon where the photographer is in relation to the tornado, overall storm, and lighting (the sun), as well as the overall structure of the storm and tornado. In this instance I was located to the southeast of the tornado. The reason the tornado is less well defined as in the other photograph is because by this point in its life cycle (about 5-10 minutes later than the other photo) rain had started to wrap around the tornado (examples for comparison). Within five minutes of my photo the tornado was hardly visible through the rain. Ks0stm  (T•C•G•E) 00:09, 25 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Support prefer alt.Nikhil(talk) 15:57, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Support with a preference for the alt. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:00, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't actually care much for the crop. It feels cluttered. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:13, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree: I think that the crop takes away some of the drama in the original. Nick-D (talk) 23:16, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Personally, I feel the extra road shifts focus away from the tornado and makes it feel more distant from the photographer. But I didn't oppose the original, so the original can still count my !vote as a support. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:05, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm fine with either version, but I will note that the tornado was distant from me...it was still a little over 2.5 mi away from me, but it was over 1 mi wide. Ks0stm  (T•C•G•E) 00:17, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Support Original. Godhulii 1985 (talk) 11:17, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

--Armbrust The Homunculus 09:55, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The original has 6 supports, while the edit only 5. Armbrust The Homunculus 09:55, 30 August 2013 (UTC)