Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Buchenwald survivor drinking from a bowl.jpg

Image:Buchenwald survivor drinking from a bowl.jpg

Original, not featured

•  Info Taken as part of U.S. Army duties, uploaded by WilliamH - nominated by WilliamH -- WilliamH 13:22, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
•  Support -- WilliamH 13:22, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
•  Strong support--Mbz1 13:26, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
•  Question A very valuable image, but maybe it can be improved a bit: The border should be removed, the leftovers of the Army caption removed, and possibly the contrast enhanced. --startaq 17:47, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Good points. I'll see what I can do. WilliamH 18:04, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I would let the US-Army Logo in the image. It's part of the story of the image. --Kolossos 11:43, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

•  Oppose Technical reasons: Bad colors. Bad composition (crop one of the two people). Non-technical reason: I want that feature imaged are nice. So it should be possible to start Commons at breakfast, and can eat farther. --Kolossos 11:43, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand - do you mean that all featured pictures shouldn't put you off your food? The thing is...not all beautiful images are valuable, and not all valuable images are beautiful. As far as I understand, this is a valuable image regarding a historical event, and I'm not exactly sure how many nice images were to be had at Buchenwald. WilliamH 20:10, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

•  Support Very powerful image. Crapload 03:34, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --PMG 10:51, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose bad scan: lack of contrast, noise, watermark --Ikiwaner 09:36, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

and I forgot: I don't like the person on the left. The image cuts his face in the middle of the nose. --Ikiwaner 09:37, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

•  Oppose poor quality. Lycaon 05:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
•  Support horrible but needed image.sensl--Sensl 02:02, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => /not featured. Richard Bartz 10:08, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Edit 1, not featured

•  Info per feedback, the border has been removed and the contrast enhanced. The army caption is rather superfluous since we know it was taken by the U.S. Army anyway, and it only blemishes the image. The image has also been downsized, fixing the grain. WilliamH 12:22, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
•  Comment Downsizing is not the proper way of removing grain. A noise filter should be used instead. (For a more verbose explanation, see my page on Downsampling.) --Stefan Vladuck 00:21, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose poor quality. Lycaon 05:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

result: 0 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Richard Bartz 10:09, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Edit 2, not featured

•  Info I gave it anotner try improving the colours. Noise is reduced too. The image still is Adobe RGB so when reviewing make shure that you have Firefox 3 with colour correction enabled or Photoshop. --Ikiwaner 09:36, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
•  Question Does AdobeRGB make sense at all for this image? It doesn't seem to contain any colours from the extended gamut. At any rate, AdobeRGB images are unsuitable for Wikipedia & Co., because Mediawiki doesn't handle colour profiles. I think there should at least be an sRGB copy. --Stefan Vladuck 10:09, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I do not agree. Maybe by end of the year MediaWiki can handle colour profiles. And your arguments ar obsolete. Unless there is some convincing reason I leave things unchanged when retouching. --Ikiwaner 19:51, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

But what's the use of AdobeRGB for this image? All the colours of this image can be represented in sRGB. And sRGB displays correctly on current software. (Besides, considering the development rate of web browsers, it's going to take more like half a decade before at least the majority of browsers understands colour profiles.) --Stefan Vladuck 20:40, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

•  Oppose poor quality. Lycaon 05:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Profound effect, and the best of the three. -- Ianare 01:36, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Crapload 19:07, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Striking. Freedom to share 19:52, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose see above. Konzentrationslager Buchenwald has much better images like the first one there. --Kolossos 20:01, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
•  Support horrible but needed image.sensl--Sensl 02:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

result: 4 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Richard Bartz 10:09, 10 June 2008 (UTC)