WikiFur:Featured picture candidates/Joe Lin

Joecifur and Lin Panda at Furry Weekend Atlanta 2007
It's a clear, focused image featuring two semi-candid furries with aesthetically pleasing suits (I like candid pictures best, personally =3). Could possibly be cropped to just have the upper torsos? Picture taken by Joecifur, used with permission. (Others are here, I just picked one I liked, but there are others there that could be considered for featured candidates.) Spaz Kitty 01:05, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Failed. --GreenReaper(talk) 00:58, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Support It looks good to me. I find the background, particularly the noticeboard, interesting without being distracting. -- Sine 01:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose On the borderline of what I'd consider too-low resolution, and the license doesn't seem to allow for it to be a featured picture. --Rat 22:37, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * On the contrary, I IMed Joe asking if I could specifically upload one or two of his pictures as potential Featured picture candidates, and he gave permission. I selected the best license for this purpose. And out of curiosity, what do you mean 'too low resolution'? It seems big enough and clear enough to be used as just a thumbnail. Spaz Kitty 23:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * When I looked, the license tag said it can only be used in articles. As for 'too low resolution', when I uploaded files at 640x480, I was informed they were too small to be featured pictures. This is only marginally bigger that 640x480. --Rat 23:28, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Here is the context of Joe's and my AIM conversation:
 * The Spaz Kitty: hey you. Would you mind if I posted a picture or two that you took at FWA on WikiFur as a featured picture candidate?
 * iynxrufus: sure go for it
 * iynxrufus: what pic out of curiosity
 * The Spaz Kitty: Okie dokie =3 I haven't decided yet...a lot of the ones you took this year were nice.
 * iynxrufus: sure feel free then :3
 * The Spaz Kitty: 'kay ^^
 * I changed the license to better clarify this; I assumed articles would include the Featured Picture articles as well. XP Spaz Kitty 23:33, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * It's debatable. We've avoided putting too many on the front page because a lot of them are pictures of people's characters, and while it may be considered "fair" to use an image of a character even without the creator's permission on the article about a character, if there's no better way of describing them, it's another thing to use it as eye candy. If we're given specific permission, I would say that's OK. --GreenReaper(talk) 03:50, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I specifically referred to 'featured pictures' in the AIM convo, so I'd say that's specific permission, no? Spaz Kitty 05:16, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes; I was speaking generally about things that are authorized for use in "articles" as opposed to featured pictures. --GreenReaper(talk) 06:14, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, at least the license now allows it to be featured picture. I think a higher-resolution image would have better chances. --Rat 03:59, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose due to resolution, it's just too small considering the composition of two people at three-quarters height. Sorry. It's a good picture otherwise, and if it were just of one person it might have sufficient detail at this size. --GreenReaper(talk) 00:38, 13 August 2007 (UTC)