Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Vert Ramp

Vert Ramp
Voting period ends on 18 Aug 2010 at 01:49:13 (UTC)
 * Reason:I feel that this image has the high technical standards required, has great EV in the pages it is in, definitely has a high 'Stop Stare and Click' value, as well as representing an area that is in my opinion under-represented at FP. Caption taken from article.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Vert ramp, Half Pipe, Vert (sport), Boardmasters Festival.
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Sport
 * Creator: JFitch  (talk)


 * Support as nominator -- JFitch  (talk)  01:49, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose Is “meh” sufficient feedback or should I expatiate? Greg L (talk) 02:38, 9 August 2010 (UTC) P.S. Elaborating here, as requested: The overly wide angle of this composition has that *point & shoot* look to it where important elements are too small.  A huge amount of real estate was used here to capture the flags sticking up into the sky, plus even more sky beyond the flags, plus building off to the left, plus grass off to the right. The end results is that one can barely see that there are guys in the half-pipe. A really good photograph would be usable in the placed size and one shouldn’t have to expand them to 1200 or more pixels to discover important elements. Moreover, the ground-level view like this looks pedestrian (both figuratively and literally). One doesn’t have to be right on the axis of the shape to give the viewer a clear sense of the shape of a half-pipe. A fine example of photography worthy of FP status would have the photographer shooting from a privileged point of view, such as up high and behind the skateboarder—perhaps with a fish-eye lens (for example). That would be eye-catching. This simply looks like the sort of image I could have captured with my iPhone… while I was walking. Ask ten dudes to take a picture of a half-pipe with a point & shoot and eight of them would come back with this thing.  Greg L (talk) 03:02, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Please elaborate.  Jujutacular  talk 02:42, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Interesting point there as actually that isn't taken from ground level at all. It was taken from a higher bank about 3-4 metres higher than the people on the ground that wasn't open to the public . Also in those articles that it's used in, I think a fancy looking fisheye shot whilst looking very pretty, would have less EV than the wide angle that shows the ramp. Your opinion though. JFitch   (talk)  08:28, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Support per nom.  Jujutacular  talk 02:42, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Fix the tilt to the left and you can have my !vote. Noodle snacks (talk) 07:00, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * By the tilt to the left I assume you are looking at the tent behing which was horribly put up on a sand dune and not actually level at all ? this can be seen when comparing to the buildings behind. The image was rotated slightly so that the platforms at the top of the ramp are in line, as this is the most accurate level for this picture considering its focus is the ramp in my opinion. JFitch   (talk)  08:28, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose. I can't help but feel that it's very crowded, which detracts from the focus of the picture. I'd be inclined to say that an FP picture of a half-pipe focuses more on the pipe and its usage- a couple of skateboarders/bikers/whatevers, maybe, but mostly of the apparatus itself. J Milburn (talk) 11:28, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose per the people in the shot - I'd rather a shot of a half pipe without everyone in front to cause a distraction... There's one near me for example that could just as adequately show a half pipe (if I had a decent camera and the weather wasn't rubbish around here) but without all the distractions around it... Gazhiley (talk) 17:37, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 01:18, 18 August 2010 (UTC)