Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ida M. Tarbell.jpg

File:Ida M. Tarbell.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Dec 2018 at 13:49:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Ida M. Tarbell.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ida M. Tarbell.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
•  Info created by James E. Purdy - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:49, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
•  Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:49, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:43, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 14:53, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
•  Comment - Good portrait. I'm not seeing what the size of the print was. Do you know? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:22, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
  • @Ikan Kekek: I'd guess about 4-7" wide - a bit smaller as cropped - but that's just a guess from the text on the original. Much smaller than that and the smaller text becomes ridiculously small, and much bigger and the big text is ridiculously big. Probably on the larger end, given the amount of detail. Adam Cuerden (talk) 07:20, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

•  Support - That seems like good detective work. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:30, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

•  Oppose The bottom half of this image appears to have been doctored - judging from the similar one on the Britannica website. Charles (talk) 11:08, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
  • It's a 1900-1920s thing. It was considered artistic to fade out. Sarcasm I can't quite resist: You probably didn't need to point to the Brittania image: She had a lower half, you know. She wasn't noted for disappearing at the waist. But seriously, it's just how images at this period were presented. You can sometimes find ones that aren't like that, but, really, it's no different than an oval frame or a crop. Note the photographer's mark on it. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:53, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
  • @Charlesjsharp: Having researched a bit, it looks like the one on the Brittania site DID do that as well, just a bit lower down, and they cropped it. See http://www.icollector.com/Ida-M-Tarbell_i14233542 Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:54, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

• This should have photographer's mark then? Same sitting. Charles (talk) 14:58, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

• @Charlesjsharp: It does. It's kind of hard to see. Look in the lower left, maybe 1/3rd of the way across the image. It's white on light grey. It'd probably be more visible on the physical copy, due to three-dimensionality? Not sure. All this photographic company's logos are white, though, from what I've seen (Category:James E. Purdy) so that's not that odd. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:55, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

• Looks like it got semi-removed during an over-zealous restoration. Charles (talk) 16:58, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

• @Charlesjsharp: Compare for yourself. File:Ida_M._Tarbell_-_Original.tif is the original Library of Congress scan. I'm pretty sure I haven't touched it, and if I did, I want to know so I can put it back. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:23, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

• Please don't display photos (at any size) other than the nominated pic since FPC Bot will misinterpret it as an "Alt" and it will mess up the closing of the nom. Please see: Commons talk:Featured picture candidates/Archive 20#Extra images disrupting the FPC closing process. --Cart (talk) 17:59, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

@W.carter: Crap, sorry. Forgot the colon before File: Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:38, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

•  Support "But where's the rest of me?" Daniel Case (talk) 16:30, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
  • @Daniel Case: I did consider using burn tool and fixing up enough of her, well, chest that it can be cropped without the fadeout. But A. I wasn't happy with the results, and B. we probably should feature the one nearest the photographer's intent. Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:38, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Tozina (talk) 19:22, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Jebulon (talk) 10:35, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:20, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People