Fair ride

Great example of a long exposure and motion blur.

• Nominate and support. - Gphoto ^talk 00:18, 24 November 2006 (UTC) reply
• Oppose. I don't necessarily see the encyclopedic nature of this picture. The subject is the ride, but with it being exposed for that length it takes away from the subject. -- dhp1080 ^{( u· t· c)} 03:49, 24 November 2006 (UTC) reply
• Oppose — You nominated this image to illustrate exposure (photography) and motion blur, yet it appears in neither article. As such, I will vote for it based on the article it IS in: fair, which it illustrates rather poorly, due to the extended exposure time. ♠ SG →Talk 07:48, 24 November 2006 (UTC) reply
  • Oh, and even if you were to add it to those articles, I'd still oppose. The image seems to be tilted at a dizzying angle, and isn't as sharp as it could be. ♠ SG →Talk 07:49, 24 November 2006 (UTC) reply
• Weak Support. It is now in those two articles, but I think the composition is a little messy. Nautica Shad e s 09:58, 24 November 2006 (UTC) reply
• Oppose. Agreed that composition is a little messy. Photo is simply not aesthetically pleasing. It could have been approached from a better angle. Krowe 12:41, 25 November 2006 (UTC) reply
• Oppose - Composition; the other pic at motion blur has fewer distracting elements but still isn't perfect. -- YFB ¿ 02:31, 26 November 2006 (UTC) reply
• Oppose. I tried nominating this image a while back, and it wasn't nominated because the subject was cut off. I have to say, I agree with that reason for opposition, and this image suffers from the same problem. -- Tewy 00:17, 29 November 2006 (UTC) reply

Not promoted Raven4x4x 02:42, 3 December 2006 (UTC) reply