Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/European Parliament delist

European Parliament edit

Composition isn't bad but the image quality is pretty poor - oversaturated, oversharpened and heavily shadow/highlighted, with significant artifacts particularly in the trees and around the sculler. The building isn't going anywhere, so there's not really any excuse for featuring a picture of this quality.

Nominate for delisting --YFB ¿ 18:03, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delist, the oversharpening is horrific. If you look at the original you can see why -- it was blurry to start. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 19:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have to admit that the digital version is not a really good quality. Last time I had to face the fact that automatically digitized slides could not compete with images done with digicams. Today I would not put the image on the FPC list any more Andreas Tille, author

Keep Well, it has mostly good quality. And it is significant. Sharkface217 19:39, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- How is it more significant than any other picture someone could go and take any day of the week? Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 20:57, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Go today and make a comparable photo (and no, I would not use this as an argument to keep a photo with technical constraints in FP). Andreas Tille, author

Delist artificial sharpening reduces effective resolution and damages appearance, you cannot get information that is not there, this is not CSI. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 23:31, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Way oversharpened, low quality, etc... Inklein 02:28, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep All I need to say.... Booksworm Talk to me! 15:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per nom. --KFP (talk | contribs) 18:40, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and get another shot of it. Witty lama 04:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delist for reasons stated by nom. --Bridgecross 20:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delisted Raven4x4x 05:22, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]