Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Pierre-Auguste Renoir 007.jpg

File:Pierre-Auguste Renoir 007.jpg, withdrawn

Voting period ends on 15 Jul 2009 at 12:00:43

•  Info created by Pierre-Auguste Renoir, uploaded by Olpl, nominated by Yann (talk) 12:00, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Huge size, great colors. Yann (talk) 12:00, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Gorgeous. -Calibas (talk) 13:19, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
•  Question The colours are great, but as I assume the picture does not look this way anymore, do we know that they ever looked so bright and saturated? -- H005 (talk) 13:53, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
•  Support I don't know the real painting. But I like this image for all the above reasons and also because we can see that the faces have several simultaneous expressions. --Zyephyrus (talk) 13:58, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose If this is to be a faithful reproduction of the real painting, then i believe the colors are unacceptably too vivid and saturated. Jeez, they are supposed to be sitting in a scenery of greenery, and now the overall yellowish-greenish hue of the painting has been so strongly removed that they are left against a pinkish-white background. I'm sorry to say that this, imho, makes no sense. --MAURILBERT (discuter) 18:20, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per Maurilbert. Lycaon (talk) 17:12, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose as per my question above and until someone provides sufficient evidence that these colours depict the actual painting. -- H005 (talk) 19:51, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
•  Comment Of course the colors don't represent the actual painting, any painting this old is going to be quite faded. This is probably a far more accurate reproduction of what it looked like right after Renoir painted it, than what is currently hanging up in the museum. We touch up old photographs all the time here, why not paintings? --Calibas (talk) 21:38, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
• With "actual painting" I did intentionally not exclude how it looked right after it had been painted. I just fear that if through image processing you e.g. simply make everything red that today is brown this might be far from what it looked back then. E.g. all the branches in the background look orange, not brown, I'm not convinced that Renoir made them look that way. -- H005 (talk) 21:44, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

• I don't think there's any way to tell precisely what it's supposed to look like. The lighting and the camera are always going to alter the colors. If the whites look white I'd say it's close enough. If somebody wants to drop the saturation a touch I'll vote for that too, but this version looks fine to me. --Calibas (talk) 01:19, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

•  Info Here, a knowledgeable contributor on wp:fr pointed me to the zoomable painting on the Art Institute of Chicago website. This should be assumed as reflecting best the way it looks today. It is far less yellowish than usually seen, yet far more subtle and muted in tones that the candidate. This contributor also mentionned that "Impressionists didn't paint in oils but in spirits and they would not varnish their paintings, so those don't become yellowish with age. Linseed oil and varnish cause yellowing." Thus, i'd guess that we are used to see old photographs of these paintings, and that the photographs yellowed way more than the actual paintings... --MAURILBERT (discuter) 00:34, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
•  Info Also, here is the original version from the .torrent with a color card, converted to JPEG format but otherwise unmodified. The TIFF version is too large to upload to Commons, but if anyone wants it, just open the .torrent in any modern BitTorrent client and tell it to only download that file. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 09:27, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

 I withdraw my nomination Seeing Ilmari Karonen file, I will nominate the other file. Yann (talk) 09:40, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => withdrawn. Maedin\talk 16:31, 14 July 2009 (UTC)