Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/BWLight

I have always really liked this picture and wanted to add it to the shadows page, but that article already has many pictures of shadows. Recently I went to the lighting page and thought it would be an eye-catching addition. This is a self-nomination, as this is a picture I shot and uploaded.

• Nominate and support. - Semiconscious (talk · home) 00:06, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Nice picture! However, one problem is that one of the stated criteria is that a featured picture should add significantly to the information in an article. This might not really fit that criteria. Thus, the nomination might be more appropriate for the Wikimedia commons featured picture. Purkinje 01:54, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• That was my fear. I believe this photo would be a great picture for the shadows page, but there are several photos of shadows on there already. If people think this is worthy as a featured picture, but feel that in order to meet the criteria for article relevence it should go somewhere else, I am open to suggestions. Semiconscious (talk · home) 08:38, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• I agree, this looks like one for the Commons. But my, how that lighting article could use some better illustrations. -- Solipsist 19:21, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, this might sound dumb, but look at the black box in the centre and then scroll up and down the image (you'll need full res), the light beams appear to be moving. Is that what it illustrates? --Fir0002 09:59, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

• This might be some type of center-surround type optical illusion. If someone writes and article about higher visual processing, this picture could definitely be featured. Purkinje 00:50, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • What about placing the picture in the article Optical illusion. With the revolation that the light seems to be moving when viewed at max res, this picture would add signifigantly to the article. Would that work? TomStar81 01:29, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. The pic has a nice geometry, but there is not really much to see or recognize -- Chris 73 Talk 22:48, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose - doesn't seem to illustrate anything. It's not an illustrative shadow pic nor a clear lighting pic, although simply as a photo I like it a lot. But sadly not FPC material - Adrian Pingstone 08:37, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. Hard to tell what it is. Enochlau 11:31, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose --ScottyBoy900Q∞ 20:34, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose -- Longhair | Talk 05:11, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose in the words of Enochlau: "Hard to tell what it is." Ahkayah cuarenta y siete 21:30, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted 2/6/0 Jtkiefer ^{T | @ | C} ----- 02:26, August 14, 2005 (UTC)