Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Vera Songwe 2

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Aug 2016 at 05:15:45 (UTC)

Reason: It's a really good-quality candid action shot. Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Vera Songwe (back in February) barely failed from lack of quorum. There's a minimal amount of motion blur on the arm, fine for a candid shot. I think it deserves another chance.
Articles in which this image appears: Vera Songwe
FP category for this image: WP:Featured pictures/People/Business
Creator: Chatham House

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 05:15, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Per nom. Although her article at 300 words is quite brief, pic is a nice 'action' capture of a fairly notable person who seems quite animated at this moment. (Doesn't hurt that subject is black & fem.) Sca (talk) 14:23, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The borders of her left hand's fingers are blurred. --Rainbow Archer (talk) 07:43, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

'Action' shot - She was gesturing. Sca (talk) 16:57, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Per nom. Vera Songwe:Look at them! They are voting for me. -The Herald (Benison) • ^{the joy of the LORD}_{my strength} 15:16, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – good EV but the focus is off on her face. The camera can do multiple exposures in one second and the subject is sitting down. No reason to settle for a moderate quality action shot. Bammesk (talk) 18:12, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The blur on the hands is easier to overlook than the blur on the face but I still think it is of acceptable quality, if only just, considering the fact that it is an action shot. Cat-five t c ---- 20:42, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. A valuable photo, and while I do applaud what I take to be the motivation for this nomination, I don't think that this matches up with our other featured portraits in terms of lighting and composition. Josh Milburn (talk) 23:24, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Not particularly outstanding and for a 2015 photo 1800-something pixels on both sides is rather small (even older generation smartphones shoot at higher resolutions). Brandmeister^talk 12:17, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @Brandmeister: That rather presumes that one always gets the framing right in camera; I think there is value to cropping sometimes. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 14:08, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose focuspoint problem. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:19, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 07:34, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]