Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/AT4 rocket launcher.jpg

< Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates

AT4 Rocket Launcher edit

 
Marine fires AT-4 rocket launcher

Found it while browsing this article. Just a really nice image and I think it depicts the article well.

  • Nominate and support. - Code E 21:03, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Note: I have just uploaded the full-quality version from the DOD website; there are no JPEG artifacts anymore. ♠ SG →Talk 12:38, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Very dramatic, sharp focus. Flash is saturated, but I don't really mind. (And: he just totally r0x0rd the dood next to him ZOMG!)Debivort 21:29, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The blown highlights are unavoidable, but there are still JPEG artifacts, and the rocket launcher isn't clearly depicted (only the projectile and its backblast). --Tewy 23:52, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Wait, I'm confused. You think the projectile and blast are clear, but the launcher isn't? It seems the complete opposite for me. The jpeg artifacts you see, are they places outside the sky? If they are only in the sky, they could be easily fixed. Debivort 02:50, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • The launcher is obscured by the person holding it, the other part (I'm not sure what it is) is obscured by the hill, and the second person is distracting from the subject. Sure, you can make out that a projectile is escaping at a high rate of speed, and that a soldier is holding it as the backblast shoots out of the back, but I'd like to see more details of the launcher itself (what's to say this isn't a different kind of launcher?). But that wasn't the main reason for my oppose. If you look around the edges of the soldier using the rocket launcher, you'll see the artifacts I'm talking about. --Tewy 03:12, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • After looking over the image more carefully, I've decided that the problems I've pointed out aren't that serious, so I'll change my vote. --Tewy 03:12, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Weak oppose. --Tewy 03:12, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it is an AT-4 rocket launcher (as stated in the source provided in it's description) but I don't think it's that hard to tell it isn't anyway. Also, the article it's used in is about Shoulder-launched missle weapons, not just that specific model. One of the main reasons I chose it because I thought it represented the article well.
As for the jpeg artifacts, there is a little there, yes, but it's not very noticeable in my opinion. Code E 12:01, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support — Excellent shot! I've just replaced the image with the unedited original from the DOD website, so the above concerns should now be addressed. ♠ SG →Talk 12:38, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support It is an very nice picture where you can actually see the power in these weapons in the picture. --Mailerdaemon 17:08, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The timing is good but in my opinion the composition is not. --KFP (talk | contribs) 19:53, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Still JPEG artifacts, bad composition. NauticaShades 21:07, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - As per Mailerdaemon --ZeWrestler Talk 20:13, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The artifacts that I can see are very minor, and besides, this isn't something that you can just go out and snap another photo of. Severnjc 22:09, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The photo is very dramatic, good quality, and very encyclopedic. Hello32020 01:58, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support Composition is very much a matter of opinion. I think that the encyclopedic value of this image well overrules any aesthetic flaws someone else may see in it. Jellocube27 14:39, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A very good picture. |
  • Oppose. Poor composition. Redquark 21:20, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The blown highlights are unavoidable in a shot like this. Seano1 21:31, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The composition makes it look like the soldier is firing the missile into the ground. Spebudmak 02:08, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Poor composition. Witty lama 12:37, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above. howcheng {chat} 22:16, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Great shot of rocket launcher in use. . 00:00, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted (11 support / 6 oppose / 1 weak oppose) --KFP (talk | contribs) 20:45, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/AT4_rocket_launcher.jpg&oldid=1138491348"