Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:52nd Street, New York, by Gottlieb, 1948.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:52nd Street, New York, by Gottlieb, 1948.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2010 at 05:54:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created by William Paul Gottlieb - uploaded by Scewing - nominated by Scewing -- Scewing (talk) 05:54, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Support -- Fantastic 1948 kodachrome photonegative of the legendary jazz nightclub scene on 52nd street in NYC. See annotations for headlining acts. Scewing (talk) 05:54, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Oppose (formerly FPX) Image does not fall within the guidelines, it is much too dark--Berthold Werner (talk) 06:27, 19 October 2010 (UTC)- Support it's a night shot. the guideline does not say images have to be taken in daylight. supreme picture, showing how the city looked way back at night. PETER WEIS TALK 07:52, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support it is a film photo from 1948.. it is not a photo where the quality has to compare with new high-tech digital image sensors.. Ggia (talk) 08:08, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Comment Also 1948 had been made good night shots. This one is none of that or it is a really bad scan. --Berthold Werner (talk) 10:29, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Neutral It's a bit blurry and noisy (even for 1948). --McIntosh Natura (talk) 11:59, 19 October 2010 (UTC)- Oppose Nothing special as far as I can see. --99of9 (talk) 12:00, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support -- Nicolas M. Perrault (talk) 12:57, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support Athyllis (talk) 19:36, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose Per 99of9. Blurry and noisy. I judge the image, I do not judge the origin or source. --Miguel Bugallo 21:13, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support As an overexposed night image, a little blur, neon glow and diffuse light is understandable. It is illustrative for New York's nightlife. --Alex:D (talk) 00:00, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose As Miguel. Lycaon (talk) 07:05, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support Encyclopedically valuable, quality OK.--MASHAUNIX 20:21, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose Should be sharper for a FP. Snowmanradio (talk) 19:41, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose Too dark. --Karelj (talk) 22:16, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose encyclopedic value is probably good, but commons should be more about the picture itself and quality + lighting is rather bad. -- Gorgo (talk) 12:50, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 7 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 13:02, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
