Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Daughters of Edward Darley Boit

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The Daughters of Edward Darley Boit[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 26 May 2013 at 02:33:12 (UTC)

Original – 1882 painting by John Singer Sargent
Large resolution image (not a Google Art Project scan, unfortunately) of a square John Singer Sargent painting that is both notable and important due to its influences on other artists and the studies and analyses made on it, including psychosexual interpretations about loss of innocence. I've seen this painting myself and it absolutely draws you in with its secrets and darkness. I am offering this as a nomination due to its importance in Sargent's career, and I am keeping my fingers crossed that Google Art Project will obtain a high-resolution scan that can supersede this image in the future (as of this writing, the actual Google Art Project website—not Commons—does not have this image in its inventory). Please note that I losslessly cropped this image to remove as much of the unfree frame as possible. Unlike my Frederic Edwin Church Rainy Season in the Tropics crop where I removed all of the frame, parts of the frame here remain because I cropped to the edges of the actual painting. Feel free to compare original/crop and approve or disapprove.
Articles in which this image appears
1. The Daughters of Edward Darley Boit
2. John_Singer_Sargent#Training
3. Las_Meninas#Influence.
The rest of these links are galleries or lists: 1880s_in_Western_fashion#Children.27s_fashion, Visual_art_of_the_United_States#Selection_of_notable_19th_century_works, Museum_of_Fine_Arts,_Boston#Highlights_from_the_American_collection, Las_Meninas_(Picasso)#Other_versions, List of works by John Singer Sargent
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
John Singer Sargent
  • Support as nominator --– Kerαunoςcopiagalaxies 02:33, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose: Original painting is huge (2 metres on each side) but the scan is only 2000px. Lots of detail lost. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:32, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
That's true. This is where my ignorance starts because I wasn't sure if this image was nominatable (I'm making up words now) or not. It certainly doesn't hold up to the larger Google Art Project scans, which are kind of setting the bar high, though it'd be prohibitively expensive to scan every single painting at such resolutions; I therefore nominated this solely for its EV, although like you said, perhaps this image is still too small, considering the size of the painting. – Kerαunoςcopiagalaxies 01:38, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
  • The EV is certainly high, but we're losing a heck of a lot of detail. This may meet the letter of the criteria, but I'm not quite sure on the spirit. We need to have some reasonable detail here. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:02, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Crisco. J Milburn (talk) 19:05, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Weak Support We can't turn down a nom because other images like it come at much higher resolutions and this one didn't. It meets the FP size requirements, and that is good enough for me. The EV is there. Sure, I too would like to have the full size, hence the weak support. --WingtipvorteX PTT 22:26, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 02:33, 26 May 2013 (UTC)