Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Isabelle Faust B 09-2012.jpg/2

File:Isabelle Faust B 09-2012.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2014 at 14:44:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Isabelle Faust B 09-2012.jpg/2 Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Isabelle Faust B 09-2012.jpg/2

•  Info Previous FPC: 3 x support, 0 x oppose --A.Savin 14:44, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
•  Support --A.Savin 14:44, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
• Strong  Oppose Terrible flash (shiny forehead, cheeks), terrible colour (jaundiced middle, flushed side), terrible clothes choice (for portrait clothes need to not grab the attention), poor pose (looking away), unfortunate facial expression, distracting background (tubes coming out of her back, into her neck), unflattering lighting direction (highlighting pores and facial hair), strange crop (you've only kept the LHS because she is looking there). The camera did its job but everything else is how not to make a good, never mind flattering, portrait of a lady. -- Colin (talk) 15:31, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

  Wow! Probably the most flattering feedback on my work ever. Just don't forget to open an RfD, as terrible photos are out of Commons scope, as you might know. --A.Savin 15:42, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

  Perhaps a courtesy deletion would be best :-). -- Colin (talk) 18:41, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

•  Oppose I am sorry. Although Colin put his decline rather harshly, I totally agree with his findings. --Florian Fuchs (talk) 18:04, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
•  Weak Support After the well-balanced feedback at the beginning, now my extreme opinion: I'm not so much in the portrait business and the slightly different skin colours in the face are a bit surprising (make-up?), but I would consider this as an clearly above average portrait of a concentrated looking musician with instrument. Light and pose are good considering that this is not a studio shot. The background and the clothes are not disturbing to me. -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 18:28, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Very good in every respect -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:38, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per Colin. Yellow nose is disturbing :( --Kikos (talk) 08:51, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
•  weak oppose Cannot follow Colin's severe assessment. I like the expression of face and body - it looks rather concentrated. Two aspects are disturbing: the steel banister at the left side in the background and the strong highlights on the face resulting from sweat + flashlight. IMHO some basic standard retouching work (skin) should be done before uploading female portrayals to Commons. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:20, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
•  Comment Needless offensive, assessment of Colin.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:03, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

We find it easy to pick fault in some remote professional's donation (e.g., although well done and looking fantastic on preview, one of the eyes isn't completely in focus at 36MP peeping or similar fussiness). Here, because Savin is one of us, we were too kind last nomination by saying nothing and he has misinterpreted that when renominating. Or perhaps we are looking to make allowances. Why? Nobody makes allowances for one of our holiday landscape/building snaps being the wrong light or bad weather? I have a whole gallery of Scandinavian professional portraits, some candid like this and some posed, and many of them could be FP perhaps and many far better than this. Do a Google Image search on the "Isabelle Faust" to see how a good portrait of her (posed or playing) might look. Then come back here and consider if "very good in every respect" is a reasonable conclusion and whether my comments are harsh but fair. FP is supposed to be our very best and make us go wow with appreciation. -- Colin (talk) 16:13, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

• •  CommentI do not doubt your honesty! Your choice of words is a bit disappointing. End of discussion?--Famberhorst (talk) 18:21, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Thank-you. I accept some may prefer I mince my words. Sorry to A.Savin if feeling bruised. Stand by my opinions, though. Better luck next time. -- Colin (talk) 19:20, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
    • See Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Eileen Collins photographed by Annie Leibovitz as part of the NASA Art Program.jpg. I rest my case. -- Colin (talk) 10:15, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose Just all wrong for an FP—bad crop, shadow to side too distracting, composition is off, and why use landscape orientation when portrait was so obviously called for? Daniel Case (talk) 03:15, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
•  Comment IMHO, I find that Colin's thorough (albeit harsh) assessment is fine. Through all this comments, photographers can learn more, understand their mistakes and thus improve their photography. If everyone is so "kind" and "considerate", how is a photographer going to improve, and how are we going to learn from one another? (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 04:17, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Colin --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 17:38, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose This picture doesn't do justice to this person. --Lionel Allorge (talk) 14:43, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 15:59, 8 January 2014 (UTC)