Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Girton College, Cambridge, England, 1890s.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Girton College, Cambridge, England, 1890s.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2019 at 14:14:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
Info created by Detroit Publishing Co. - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:14, 26 December 2018 (UTC)- Info Library of Congress scans have a lot of ambiguity as to colour balance - this is fairly well-known, unfortunately. As such, I balanced it against actual photos of the college. I think this is an excellent historical image, near enough to the time period of the college's founding to be meaningful, though, as a photochrom - a secondarily coloured black and white image - there's a tradeoff between the historic value and the inherent flaws of the medium, and there are certain inaccuracies that result. This is, however, by and large, excellently done. Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:14, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:14, 26 December 2018 (UTC)- Support -- Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 19:27, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
Comment - Very good. Is the writing on the lower right OK, or does that fall under the ban on watermarks and so forth? I hope it doesn't fall under that ban, but I'd like to know. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:34, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Ikan Kekek: That's for modern additions; it's generally bad practice to remove things from hundred plus year artworks that have been part of them throughout, unless there's a good reason to do so. It's part of the historical artefact. In fact such things are explicitly permitted in Commons:Watermarks#What_are_not_watermarks Adam Cuerden (talk) 10:29, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support - I'm happy to support. I may have missed it, but I don't actually see this specific kind of case referenced in "What are not watermarks". It would be good to have somewhat more specificity in how old a photo has to be for captions or other writing on the photo to be OK under this site's guidelines. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:38, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Ikan Kekek: Yeah, there's a rather massive "etcetera" in there, which could be a lot more helpful. It does say "captions and signatures on historic plates" - which this is quite close to, a caption on a historic print that (by the very nature of the medium) only exists in print form. Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:00, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
Oppose Destructive color restoration. --Photographer 02:16, 28 December 2018 (UTC)- Support Daniel Case (talk) 07:23, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 10:12, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 23:47, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
