Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Julia Margaret Cameron - John Herschel (Metropolitan Museum of Art copy, restored) levels.jpg

File:Julia Margaret Cameron - John Herschel (Metropolitan Museum of Art copy, restored) levels.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2018 at 11:00:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Julia Margaret Cameron - John Herschel (Metropolitan Museum of Art copy, restored) levels.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Julia Margaret Cameron - John Herschel (Metropolitan Museum of Art copy, restored) levels.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
•  Info created by Julia Margaret Cameron, restored and uploaded by Ahecht, nominated by -- Yann (talk) 11:00, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support We have several copies of this picture. This is not the highest resolution, but I think it is the best. More than 150 years old, and yet so striking. -- Yann (talk) 11:00, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:50, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support - This gets my support because of the intense face. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:51, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:36, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:58, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support per Ikan Kekek --Habitator terrae 🌍 18:44, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support for historic value and evocative expression. --Pine^✉ 06:14, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Schnobby (talk) 06:27, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 12:37, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Oppose But tip of his nose is not in focus.Paolobon140 (talk) 13:39, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

• @Paolobon140: You must be joking. Please provide a valid reason for opposing. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:15, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

• Im not used to joke. It is a valid reason to oppose, as i can read in https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Angelica_-_a_Seri_woman.jpg An unfocused tip of nose, in my point of view is a valid reason to oppose and it seems it might be for others too.Paolobon140 (talk) 14:23, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

• Yes, for a recent picture, but here it is from 1867, so it is a complete nonsense. Yann (talk) 14:34, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

• In year 1867 they had full possibility to have a nose tip perfectly in focus as an optical bank was used here. If the photographer decided to have a non-in-focus tip of nose must have been his personal creative choice which i dont support. I respect your point of view about modern noses needing to be in focus while old noses can also not be, but you should respect my opinion too. Or am I wrong? "Nonsense" is a personal attack, by the wayPaolobon140 (talk) 14:38, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

• Nonsense is about your vote, not about yourself, so it is not a personal attack. So yes, you are wrong. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:46, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

• So you are meaning that a user may have a point of view which is "wrong" when he is commenting on a photograph and that his opinion is not respectable? And are you sure that a nose cannot be out of focus "for a recent picture", but it can be if the picture was taken in 1867? If, so, is it written somewhere? May i have a link to commons rules about that, as you stated that i am wrong?Paolobon140 (talk) 16:40, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

• FYI, I also think that comments about unsharp nose in File:Angelica_-_a_Seri_woman.jpg are wrong. This is an excellent portrait, sharp, with good light and composition. Regards, Yann (talk) 06:12, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

• Sharp (but not necessarily), with good light and composition is a basic characteristic for any photograph taken by a professional photographer. At those times photographers were more skilled than today ones and were equipped with extremely precise cameras. That professional photographer, though, made a mistake in calculating DOF here and he didn't shoot a second photograph to correct the mistake. That is the reason why I strongly oppose. From a professionale i expect a flawless picture.Paolobon140 (talk) 10:28, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

• It seems you don't understand anything about portrait photography. Regards, Yann (talk) 12:27, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

• We are lucky having you here as a professor of photography. I am sure you can teach us something about portrait photography then. I will not consider your 3rd personal attack to me, but I am counting them.Paolobon140 (talk) 13:36, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

• your discussion is unpleasant and without mutual respect. I don't think it is necessary to continue.--S. DÉNIEL (talk) 16:51, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

•  Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 16:51, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 19:01, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:54, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People