Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Russian Air Force Kamov Ka-50

Russian Air Force Kamov Ka-50 edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2010 at 15:02:21 (UTC)

Original - a Kamov Ka-50 of the Russian Air Force

Reason: A high quality photograph which shows off the Kamov Ka-50 in a great way.
Articles in which this image appears: Kamov Ka-50, Russian Air Force
FP category for this image
Creator: Dmitriy Pichugin

Support as nominator --Russavia ^{I'm chanting as we speak} 15:02, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose In an apparent effort to preserve detail in the clouds of all things, the main subject (the helicopter) is too dark. Greg L (talk) 15:54, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Might be your monitor Greg - Looks perfectly light enough to me... The dark bits are black anyway... gazhiley.co.uk 20:48, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - It isn’t either my 27-inch iMac LCD monitor or my 21-inch Sony Trinitron external monitor; both are adjusted properly and award-winning photography featured on photography-related sites always look good. Greg L (talk) 14:58, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Fair enough... maybe mine's lighter than it should be then... gazhiley.co.uk 15:43, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice image, but too small, leaves me wanting to see more detail. P. S. Burton (talk) 21:01, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. It's a rare aircraft, and moving at speed, but a featured picture should at least show all of the blades. Good shot apart from poor composition. Mostlyharmless (talk) 02:32, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I see all six blades...Parsecboy (talk) 20:29, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I think he means the entire blade. Makeemlighter (talk) 03:08, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - very good picture of a helicopter in flight. The slight blur on the blades makes it just dynamic enough to work. Detail is excellent on my 27-inch iMac LCD monitor. :-) Tim Pierce (talk) 01:02, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose The composition and backlighting keep this short of FP - also, this image is not irreplacable and standards are appropriately higher.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhatfield (talk • contribs) 14:45, 19 September 2010

Not promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 14:36, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]