Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Talbot Lago

1950 Talbot Lago T26 Grand Sport

 * Reason:A rare and beautiful GP car.
 * Articles this image appears in:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lago-Talbot
 * Creator:Russell Smithies

MER-C 06:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Support as nominator &mdash; Russellsmithies 21:06, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose Subject is cut off, backgound is poor (the road is distracting and the portion of another automobile is even worse). Portions of the car are blown (mainly the engine). Also, some smaller distracting features are very small halos from sharpening and very slight, but still noticeable, amounts of chromatic abberation. Also, when nominating, it usually is better to give the virtues of the image rather than of the subject ("A rare and beautiful GP car") because featured pictures a chosen as being exceptional images, rather than snapshots of exceptional subjects, as this one is. Thegreenj 21:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanx for the comments. The photo is straight from the camera with no sharpening, cropping or alteration so any jpg artifacts, halos, or chromatic abberations are probably the result of a crap camera. This is my first attempt at a 'featured picture' so I'll try harder next time. Russellsmithies 00:38, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Even with the "crap camera," the majority of my oppose stems from your angle, exposure, and background. Try again on the same camera with a different composition; you will be amazed at the increase in quality you alone, as the photographer, can make. Also, though I am not a huge fan of excessive photoshopping, it can't hurt to clone out those purple fringes, and your camera probably has has "sharpness" setting that you can lower just a tad ensure that you do not have halos or other sharpening artifacts. Thegreenj 03:06, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose Per Thegreenj. 8thstar 22:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose Strange composition, the car is jammed on the left of the frame - Adrian Pingstone 22:22, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|15px]] Oppose - am I the only one to notice that the image is copyrighted? As well as Green's comments, which I agree with. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 10:22, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * No you are not. But this is absolutely irrelevant. From Copyright: work once created from originality through 'mental labor' is instantaneously considered copyrighted to that person. This has nothing to do with the license, and in fact the image page states: the copyright holder allows the image to be freely redistributed, modified, used commercially and for any other purpose, provided that their authorship is attributed, which is a perfectly acceptable licensing for FPC. --Dschwen 14:44, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Photo was taken by me so I've probably added the right copyright notice. Russellsmithies 00:27, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Whoops... 'pologies. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 10:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose Can't see important parts of subject - Ishaana 13:21, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose see above--Penubag 08:18, 13 April 2007 (UTC)penubag