Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Gordon Tobing (c. 1960), by Tati Studios.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

File:Gordon Tobing (c. 1960), by Tati Studios.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Aug 2017 at 06:46:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gordon Tobing

Gordon Tobing

ALT -- Logo removed.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:29, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Support per above. Daniel Case (talk) 01:57, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Almost forgot  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:17, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Daphne Lantier 03:51, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose both versions. Seems a bit soft even for a 1960s photograph, crop is a bit tight for my taste – but both of that that might have to do with this being a promotional image (for autograph cards?). Over-all not a very convincing portrait in my book: If you want to want to promote a professional guitar player, you certainly don't want him to look at his fingers like a student (especially when he's only playing a simple A-minor chord). No "wow" for me. --El Grafo (talk) 13:49, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Softness can be attributed in part to the medium; the paper used was a very grainy kind, and thus to reduce that some softening was applied. Likewise, the close crop was made by the studio. The physical photograph has the same composition. Heck, this version has had an extra fifty or so pixels added. Please also keep in mind that the technology being used in Indonesia was not the same you'd expect from contemporary American studios. I'd be surprised if the camera here was any less than five years old. Might have even been this one. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:24, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Daniel Case: Don't get me wrong: Given the size/intended usage of the original, the sharpness is perfectly fine. It just appeared to me as if the paper would have been able to resolve more detail than was present in the negative. But that's of course irrelevant and not the reason for my oppose. I just should have kept my finger still (and I should probably be trouted for pixel-peeping something like this). The "no wow" remains, though. --El Grafo (talk) 15:04, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Whoops, no idea why I pinged Daniel when I was answering to Chris – sorry! --El Grafo (talk) 15:18, 9 August 2017 (UTC) [reply]
Not a problem ... I was just about to tell you about that . Daniel Case (talk) 16:02, 9 August 2017 (UTC) [reply]
  • I wish they'd use better quality paper, yes. The Indriati Iskak image I mentioned above was on much smoother paper. Mind, this was still better than the paper used for File:Chitra Dewi, c. 1955.jpg (turns out I don't have the unedited version on Commons!). As for the pose/wow, I have no issues with your oppose. I just wanted to point out the technical aspects are a bit different than one would expect.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:38, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /PumpkinSky talk 00:25, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Gordon_Tobing_(c._1960),_by_Tati_Studios.jpg&oldid=255660619"