Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:STS-133 Discovery Lift Off Launch Pad 39A KSC.jpg

File:STS-133 Discovery Lift Off Launch Pad 39A KSC.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Mar 2011 at 18:28:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:STS-133 Discovery Lift Off Launch Pad 39A KSC.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:STS-133 Discovery Lift Off Launch Pad 39A KSC.jpg

1315

827

53

165

3000

1985

JPEG artifacts? Coloured banding following the outline of the mast.

2617

1158

119

298

3000

1985

Artifacts: JPEG "cubes" and coloured banding

•  Info created by NASA - uploaded & nominated by Originalwana (talk) 18:28, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
•  Info Discovery lifts off for the final time.
•  Support As nominator Originalwana (talk) 18:28, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
•  Support Great shot! --Aktron (talk) 18:55, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
•  Oppose I think File:STS-125 Atlantis Liftoff 02.jpg which already featured is much better. Additionally, we already have 5 or 6 FP of space shuttles. --JovianEye (talk) 19:38, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
•  Oppose +90°. --Mile (talk) 21:08, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
•  Support I like this one too and I think the only reason it doesn't look to be 90 degrees is because of the photographer's perspective and anyway it's not a bad view. -- One, please. ( _{^{Thank you.}}) 00:27, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
•  Request what about a little correction of perspective? The water tank on the right should stand straight and not tilted as it is. I'll happily support such an edit because I like the composition making wise use of the steam and smoke clouds in nice colours. Grand-Duc (talk) 00:31, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

•  Request Could anyone please correct the perspective of this image per above? I don't really know how to do it properly. Originalwana (talk) 09:54, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

•  Done I think. -- One, please. ( _{^{Thank you.}}) 13:34, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

•  Neutral It is a pity that the NASA employee used such a strong JPEG compression, there are visible artifacts, I've annotaed two points where there could be seen when zoomed in at 100%. Additionally, there is some banding in the sky... So I really do not know at this moment if the uniqueness of this moment and the atmospheric lightning are enough "mitigating circumstances" per COM:IG for me to support. I'll pore over on it. Grand-Duc (talk) 20:30, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
•  Oppose JPEG artifacts per Grand Duc, plus grainy clouds.--Snaevar (talk) 23:49, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
•  Oppose per JovianEye. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 17:26, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:20, 26 March 2011 (UTC)