Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Loren Pankratz
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2012 at 13:08:44 (UTC)
- Reason
- High EV and quality
- Articles in which this image appears
- Loren Pankratz
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Others
- Creator
- Sgerbic
- Support as nominator --Tomer T (talk) 13:08, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
- Comment I'm a little concerned about the copyright of this image. Such studio shots are rarely free. Though the uploader claims to be a studio photographer, my concern is the following, was Loren Pankratz notified that his picture would be released under a free license? In the United States (where I'm assuming the pic was taken), in creative work for hire (such as a studio shot) the copyright belongs to the one who paid for the work. The creator may still get credit for having created the work, but has no copyright rights unless an agreement was signed with the one who paid for the work. Once that is cleared up, I will support the image per the nom. --WingtipvorteX PTT ∅ 15:20, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
- IANAL, but my understanding is that it is the other way around. Copyright belongs to the photographer, unless an agreement is signed passing it over to the subject. In this case, I have little doubt that the uploader is the photographer if they claim to be so, and I would trust a professional photographer to know the copyright status of their own photographs. J Milburn (talk) 22:04, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
- Further, though this is posed, I do not believe that it is a studio shot. I suspect that it was taken on the same day as the other photos of the subject from this photographer, just against a neutral background. The author may be able to confirm this. J Milburn (talk) 22:07, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
- IANAL, but my understanding is that it is the other way around. Copyright belongs to the photographer, unless an agreement is signed passing it over to the subject. In this case, I have little doubt that the uploader is the photographer if they claim to be so, and I would trust a professional photographer to know the copyright status of their own photographs. J Milburn (talk) 22:04, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
- Possibly. Has anyone asked the author? --WingtipvorteX PTT ∅ 21:38, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
- I would have to do more research to be sure. What I do know, from when I registered some of my works with the copyright office, is that the artwork I created at someone's request for hire legally belonged to the one that paid me for it. There may be a different provision for photographers. If there isn't, I'm not sure this has been ever tested in court. --WingtipvorteX PTT ∅ 21:38, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
- Support. An excellent portrait, to my eye, and one that just screams "academic". J Milburn (talk) 22:07, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
- Weak support after discussion above. I would vote full support if this image met the 1500 pixel minimum on the short side. As it is, it's a good portrait of the subject. Pine✉ 01:01, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
- Support per J Milburn --Mediran talk 12:08, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
- Support per nom. Agree with JM, excellent portrait. My earlier concern still stands, but should it be true, it would be the uploader's responsibility. --WingtipvorteX PTT ∅ 21:44, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
- Support. A very well composed portrait. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 13:10, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
Promoted File:Loren Pankratz 2011.jpg --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:28, 12 September 2012 (UTC)