Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Two F-22A Raptor in column flight - (Noise reduced).jpg

F-22 Raptor

 * Reason:Great Image of F-22 Raptor. The front F-22 is well focused while the column formation provides the wow factor.)
 * Articles this image appears in:F-22 Raptor
 * Creator:US Airforce


 * Support as nominator --Kalyan (talk) 17:09, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose There is quite a bit of noise in the F-22 Raptor in the back... « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 17:16, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, there is a bit, but I wouldn't call it overly conspicuous or detrimental. The trouble is, noise reduction can be done, but it turns the detail in the hills behind to mush. I've just made an edit with selective noise reduction only of the planes and of the exhaust fumes where there is no detail that would be missed (feathered so it blends nicely). Diliff  | (Talk)   (Contribs) 17:37, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak support edit1 - Thanks for the noise reduction Diliff. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 15:12, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Support with preference for edit 1. Good capture. I'm sure this image has been nominated before but perhaps not... Or a different version? Diliff  | (Talk)   (Contribs) 17:37, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak support edit 1 The haze over the second plane is a little bothersome, imo. But an otherwise great photo. ¢rassic ! (talk) 19:02, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Support. The haze prevents me from giving this otherwise good image my full support. Nautica Shad es  21:13, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Support edit1 I have no problem with the haze - it's inevitable with a shot from the front in column flight that the rear plane will be photographed through the jet exhaust of the front plane. Mfield (talk) 03:26, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Oppose The exhaust from the leading raptor just spoils the image. Also im not keen on the angle this has been taken from either. I love the aircraft but not this photo unfortunately. Sedd&sigma;n talk Editor Review 22:45, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I think its odd that people are having a problem with the jet exhaust. It's a jet fighter, it has jet exhaust. This is WP FP, not Commons FP, and if anything this adds to the encyclopedic value of the image. If the front plane were obscured by exhaust that would be one thing, but the second plane is really just a background object and when you put things behind a jet fighter in flight, they aren't going to be sharp. Mfield (talk) 22:58, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't have a problem with just the exhaust but given that the first jet only occupies the bottom 2/3rds of the image, to me is seems that having the top third be occupied by a jet just doesn't do anything for this image and in my opinion decreases the quality of the image. I'm more than aware that jets have jet exhausts, i have studied jet propulsion in enough detail to realise that, but in my opinion there is too much of this image that detracts from the leading aircraft. Sedd&sigma;n talk Editor Review 00:21, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair enough - I wasn't by any means targetting you with that btw - hence a general comment rather than a reply to your oppose. It only sprang to mind to make the comment as a number of poeple had mentioned it weakening their support. Mfield (talk) 00:26, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Of course i didnt presume that, i think its just one of those things that makes people hesitant with that image. Sedd&sigma;n talk Editor Review 01:28, 2 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Support Very cool! Clegs (talk) 15:07, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Support edit 1. Blur from exhaust is natural phenomenon, has EV. One plane is in good view, should be enough. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 17:41, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Either, but prefer original, not necessary to edit. --Blechnic (talk) 06:41, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

MER-C 08:46, 7 July 2008 (UTC)