Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:DTM Mercedes w204 Schneider amk.jpg

Panning picture of a DTM racing car

Reason: It is a good example of a panning shot (exp. 1/100s).
Articles this image appears in: Panning (camera)
Creator: AngMo (Commons: AngMoKio)

Support as nominator AngMo (talk) 07:34, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
oppose the tilt is unnecessary and distracting for a photo intending to illustrate a photographic technique. de Bivort 18:56, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree about the tilt.. but, had this previously been cropped? With a little more side-of-the-racetrack the tilt could be corrected. gren グレン 19:51, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I added a new version. Is it better? --AngMo (talk) 20:09, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support original For the article that this image appears on, I believe the tilt helps demonstrate the effect. crassic!^[talk] 23:50, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose I don't think it's a particularly good illustration of panning - there's much better images out there. You really need a background which "streaks" a lot better. Because on the image description page it's not really obvious it's a motion blur photo - it only looks like a car. And at thumbnail size (which is what it is in the article) there is no indication it's a motion blur. For examples of what I mean by "streaking" have a look at [1] [2] [3] [4]. The tarmac in this photo looks the same despite the panning as it doesn't have any details. Even this I think is a better example thanks to the sharply defined straw tips. --Fir0002 06:24, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with Fir. A better (= worse, in this case ;-) background would explain more... --Janke | Talk 14:56, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose. Nice picture, just not the best possible panning example. Agree with Fir, nice examples by the way! Those guys should be recruited for Wikipedia ;-). --Dschwen 16:12, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A nice picture, but a not so nice example of panning. WN1971... A Symbol of Freedom 15:32, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted . --John254 00:25, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]