Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:PortraitGirl2005-1.jpg

Image:PortraitGirl2005-1.jpg

•  Info I’m not sure if this place is ready to accept common “non-exotic” human portraits. Last time I dared to propose one, in my first Commons nomination, it was quickly and violently kicked-off (here). I suppose it won’t be necessary to explain why this kind of picture is valuable, and not only for those who care about the people in the portrait. After all, people (Homo sapiens sapiens) is in a clear minority among Commons FP species. I suppose it won’t be really disappointing if the nomination fails miserably, but I’ll be happy if there is some discussion about the subject. Created and nominated by Alvesgaspar - Alvesgaspar 14:15, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Version 1 (left), not featured

•  Support --Alvesgaspar 14:15, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Neutral quality of the image on the face is OK, but I don't like the rupture on the left and the plastic chair. Also, the edges of the hair seem blurry (maybe bad light or shadows?). Still, not oppose. --Orlovic (talk) 20:53, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Support One step back- It could be of good encyclopedic value as for example "a girl with mediterranean features" like similar in [1] --Orlovic (talk) 21:03, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Neutral for now. Maybe a slight crop? --Dschwen 21:23, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose because of the composition, most probably crop going through the shoulders. --che 22:01, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Comment Hello Alvesgaspar, i think this photo is really good and i would give you a pro if there would be another version where there is more space left on the right side. Then the photo would be perfect - then the head wouldnt be centered. Same is true for this photo (Image:PortraitGirl2005-2.jpg) of yours that i also like a lot - here you should leave some more space on the left side. This girl has a very photogenic and pretty face. --AngMoKio 06:12, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Discussion moved to the talk page. --Makro Freak 16:15, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose Not a bad picture. Perhaps a quality image. But not worth a featured picture. See here or there for featured picture portraits. Beside documentary interrest, they have -in my opinion- a much higher quality. Sorry Berrucomons 21:19, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose As per above. –Dilaudid 22:04, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Crop it how you wish, a great photo :-) --Tony Wills 09:38, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 07:55, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Version 2 (right) - featured

•  Info - I've tried to address the concerns of Dschwen and AngMokio with this version. A crop through the shoulders doesn't work well, I'm afraid - Alvesgaspar 08:31, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Support - Alvesgaspar 13:37, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Support much better --Simonizer 12:47, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Support This process of interactive remixing during a nomination is kinda strange for me. Why you cannot find the propper crop and adjustments before and stay to your picture? This is the last time i support a process like this. <-- This was much to dogmatic! :) --Makro Freak 16:06, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
  •  Comment - This "interactive remixing" is imported from the English FPC. IMO it is an effective way of profiting from the users' expertises and improving the quality and usefulness of the pictures. Alvesgaspar 16:16, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
    •  Comment - But then you should give credits in the image description for co-authors. --Makro Freak 16:21, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
    •  Comment What about improving images at COM:QIC and Commons:Photography_critiques instead of here ? I have a feeling that sometimes pictures get featured here because the apparant progressing improvement during multiple additions of small edits to an image seem so good that people in the end think that the improved image should be featured. But if that improved picture was shown alone from the start it might not have been featured. Just a little theory, I don't claim that this is a fact. /Daniel78 18:24, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
      • I've had the same theory for quite some time, glad to see I'm not alone. --Dschwen 05:29, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
•  OpposeBerrucomons 21:20, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose Great portrait but just not enough edge for FP. –Dilaudid 22:08, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Crop it how you wish, a great photo :-) --Tony Wills 09:38, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --Bergwolf 10:43, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Romary 11:14, 8 June 2007 (UTC)PS : Version 2 is better than version 1. PS2 : what is funny and I am glad with that, nobody argue that this picture cannot be used and have no value (see discussion bellow for an other portrait).
  • You missed the discussion on the talk page. -- Ram-Man 14:00, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Support oh, I forgot --Orlovic (talk) 18:04, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --AngMoKio 20:13, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

 Result: 8 support, 2 oppose >> featured - Alvesgaspar 14:37, 17 June 2007 (UTC)