This image has the better sharpness in the category. It is most faithful, even at a thumbnail size, and thus more suitable for a use in others wikis. -- Oakenchips (talk)
Comment - I haven't been to the Musee d'Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris since 2002 and don't remember what this painting looked like. There are two pictures in this category. Please explain how and why this is the better of the two. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:46, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - OK, I see your reasoning. Keeping in mind that we are judging only how useful the image is as a thumbnail in a web-posted article, it could be argued that because of its greater brightness and even posterization, File:Kandinsky - Bild mit rotem Fleck.jpg is more easily visible, and therefore, more useful. But it also looks like it's missing details your photo has; is that correct? If it's correct, your photo is best in scope even as a thumbnail, but please address this. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:56, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
