Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/File:Charge of the Light Brigade2.jpg
<
delist
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2010 at 20:01:06 (UTC)
- Reason
- Quite simply, it's clearly and obviously wrong: This is the original image. Note its primary colour is yellow. The paper is very nearly white, and these images are always placed upon a white surface, which can be seen, and is, indeed, white. Those two circumstances do not allow for radical recolouring. However, the restoration has radically recoloured it, changing the yellow to blue. I don't see how that can possibly be justified.
- Articles this image appears in
- Charge of the Light Brigade
- Previous nomination/s
- Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Charge of the Light Brigade
- Nominator
- Adam Cuerden (talk)
- Delist and replace — Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:01, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- Delist Restoration has gone too far and to me now seems misleading. JFitch (talk) 20:53, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- Please notify the original uploader/nominator. Thanks. Makeemlighter (talk) 02:46, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- Done, though I don't think she edits anymore. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:18, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- Comment Um, forgive me for being naive, but why exactly is this a problem? Changing the color balance in Photoshop isn't really radically recoloring. Yellow and blue are opposites in color balance. Also, explain to my why this "radical" restoration detracts from the image, degrades its quality, or makes it an unsuitable illustration of the subject?--AutoGyro (talk) 00:05, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- It's simply inaccurate: Simpson illustrations tend to use a fair amount of yellow; when that yellow gets replaced with blue, they are no longer what the artist intended. To give a real-life example, it's like having a picture of the Sahara desert with blue sand. The colour balance has no resemblance to reality. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:59, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- But the EV of that image is not because that it's a Simpson illustration, but because a depiction of a specific event, and a rather good one at that. If the argument was that the image was used to show specifically how these types of illustrations are made, then I would understand. --AutoGyro (talk) 06:01, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- We regularly delist or deny images for that sort of flaw. FPs are the best of the best, not simply "good enough". Adam Cuerden (talk) 08:20, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- Delist and replace That the the illustration doesn't show the proper colours is of course a problem. It is misleading, and I would even call it original research. I think the Sahara example illustrates this clearly. P. S. Burton (talk) 17:47, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- We regularly delist or deny images for that sort of flaw. FPs are the best of the best, not simply "good enough". Adam Cuerden (talk) 08:20, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- But the EV of that image is not because that it's a Simpson illustration, but because a depiction of a specific event, and a rather good one at that. If the argument was that the image was used to show specifically how these types of illustrations are made, then I would understand. --AutoGyro (talk) 06:01, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- It's simply inaccurate: Simpson illustrations tend to use a fair amount of yellow; when that yellow gets replaced with blue, they are no longer what the artist intended. To give a real-life example, it's like having a picture of the Sahara desert with blue sand. The colour balance has no resemblance to reality. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:59, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- Replacement added - Suggest Delist and replace. Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:49, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- Delist and replace now that an alternative is present, I can support this. --AutoGyro (talk) 16:05, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- Delist and replace, new version seems more accurate. J Milburn (talk) 23:04, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
- Delist and replace --Avenue (talk) 07:33, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
- Comment I stick with my delist vote, and may support a replace but I feel that the replacement needs cropping tighter, there is really no need for the massive amount of white border. The left, right and top sides can be cropped without losing any of the text from the bottom. JFitch (talk) 17:31, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
- That may look good in thumbnail, but, to me, I always think it looks a bit unbalanced at any higher resolution. Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:44, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
- At full res the border is even more distracting. It's not unbalanced as the crop would be even still leaving it centre of the canvas horizontally. JFitch (talk) 07:59, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you mean by "unbalanced", since it was, after all, printed with a border. But I'll hazard a guess as I'm about to leave for 2 days. The image's borders, like most Victorian images aren't perfectly straight. While this one is nearer true than most, the top border noticeably tilts upwards, for instance. Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:08, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- That may look good in thumbnail, but, to me, I always think it looks a bit unbalanced at any higher resolution. Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:44, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
Replaced with File:William Simpson - Charge of the light cavalry brigade, 25th Oct. 1854, under Major General the Earl of Cardigan.jpg --Makeemlighter (talk) 03:11, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
