Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/towerofhanoi

towerofhanoi[edit]

Entire image extremely grainy. Bad quality, small, and poor technical animation. (maximize image to view thoroughly).

Nominate and Delist. - AJ24 20:48, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. I see no graininess whatsoever. What are you referring to? -- moondigger 21:01, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- In the animated shadow of the object. Remember to maximize the photo before viewing, apparently there are some technical problems viewing without maximizing. -- AJ24 21:10, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - I don't understand what you call graininess in such a picture. Ericd 20:12, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I see nothing wrong with it at all. PPGMD 21:56, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per PPGMD --Fir0002 22:35, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- Chris 73 | Talk 22:38, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I see the graininess too. Actually, more like the animation leaves bits of the disks behind after they move. This is in Firefox. -- ShinmaWa^(talk) 04:41, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delist. Much too few frames, and grainy. Keep if it can be made about as smooth as my alternative version, which is not a piece of art but at least is easier to look at. --Bernard 09:57, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - prefer Bernard's version, but this is still good enough and is a fascinating subject. However, I'm not sure that AJ24 completely understands animated GIFs... —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξ φ 13:17, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Illustrates the article perfectly. — BRIAN0918 • 2006-07-19 20:18
Neutral, I do see graininess... but, I'm not sure it's anything bad. My biggest problem is the movement of the pieces... I prefer the sing-song flow of the other image. But that's not a reason to delist, I don't believe. It could be bigger... but then you'd get scaling issues (for me in firefox when scaled to 300px I saw artifacts). gren グレン 02:30, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Even though the image's subject is still in my opinion unexceptional and insignificant, the new image submitted by Bernard has no problems with quality. The original Tower of Hanoi needs to be replaced by the new image of greater quality. -- AJ24 19:32, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quality? The new image looks worse then the original, I like the movement quality, but the look of the old one is simply better. PPGMD 19:59, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delist - Bernard's version is far superior. Jono (talk) 21:05, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The use of 3D objects is far superior to the use of a flat animation, if the bernard image is so good why hasn't it been nominated for FP Gnangarra 03:23, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Looks good to me. -Ravedave 07:42, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retained. 3 Delist, 3 Neutral, 7 Keep --Fir0002 10:44, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]