Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Ladakh Woman (Portrait): Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 00:49, 19 May 2008

Portrait of a Ladakh Woman

Reason: Beautifully lit and framed photo of a woman in traditional dress. Reminiscent of an Andrew Wyeth painting.
Articles this image appears in: Ladakh
Creator: Steve Evans (Flickr)

Support as nominator Verne Equinox (talk) 03:27, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I was all ready to support this stunning portrait. I mean, look at the light and the subject and the ENC value. However, at full size, there is an unacceptable number of compression artifacts that muddle the image significantly. I hope it would be possible to get a less compressed version. -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 05:22, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose To be sure, the content of the image is worthy of an FP and the composition and lighting is good. However, the compression, making this image a tiny 85kb, is extremely detrimental to the quality of the image. Compression artifacts are visible throughout the image and cannot be fixed with software. A great shame because in other respects, it is a fine image. Capital photographer (talk) 07:31, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Not sure if anyone's in touch with the Creator, but it'd be great to get a higher-resolution version (sans compression) if possible. If not, the photo's so striking that I'm ready to support anyway on technique, EV, and rarity of photo ops. SingCal 17:37, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I used to be in touch with him, but I'm agnostic now. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 22:05, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Gosh, you'd think being the Creator, he could fix the artifacts in an instant...breathe | inhale 02:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Heh. Glad I could do my part in giving FPC something to laugh at. SingCal 22:23, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. An edited version has been added. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 19:21, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The edit is little better. Compression artifacts are still quite obvious and the face seems to be lacking fine detail. Capital photographer (talk) 07:21, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Both Great pose, but there's artifacting, especially in the top right corner, and the blown windows on the R side are distracting. Clegs (talk) 20:39, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I sent the photographer a message, but I don't know if he'll get back before this is due to close. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 11:01, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- He said he would get us a higher resolution in ten days. He's travelling and doesn't have access. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 08:49, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Propose we Suspend the nom until we hear back; ten days isn't too bad. Matt Deres (talk) 10:36, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Support above proposed extension, Pete Tillman (talk) 05:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suspended until 17 May pending high res version. --jjron (talk) 22:51, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nom re-opened May 18 No sense waiting much longer. Matt Deres (talk) 00:48, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 **'''Support''' above proposed extension, [[User:Tillman|Pete Tillman]] ([[User talk:Tillman|talk]]) 05:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 '''Suspended''' until 17 May pending high res version. --[[User:Jjron|jjron]] ([[User talk:Jjron|talk]]) 22:51, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
+'''Nom re-opened May 18''' No sense waiting much longer. [[User:Matt Deres|Matt Deres]] ([[User talk:Matt Deres|talk]]) 00:48, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
 <!-- additional votes go above this line  -->
 {{-}}