Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Recife, the Brazilian capital of social inequality.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

File:Recife, the Brazilian capital of social inequality.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2020 at 00:14:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Recife, the Brazilian capital of social inequality
Basile Morin please could you add more information about what is overprocessed for you? --Wilfredor (talk) 00:23, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, many things can be at the origin of this artificial aspect and this is more your role I think to find which button you turned excessively here, however in my view there's too much clarity, too much contrast, and this is visible immediately at the thumbnail. Looking at full size just gives a confirmation of this first negative impression -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:32, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Since a new version was uploaded 5 hours ago without notification on this page, I just want to warn the reader my comment above is concerning this version, and not the current image. Clearly a tremendous change. Much more natural now, although the light is not great unfortunately. In any case, please let us know which version is valid for this candidature -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:48, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your review, sorry for not inform abot the reupload, however I was very tired yesterday, you was right, also I was working over the JPG file and not over the RAW, the result is a image with more details, also i uploaded the source file too. Thanks --Wilfredor (talk) 12:31, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Info Fix gallery, you need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 10:10, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment From my point of view, once you switch to b&w, you actually can go a bit overboard with the processing and get an interesting and better result. I remember another nom as a good example of what going "outside the box" can do. This is a lively and interesting photo that could benefit from an editing that accentuates the people in the photo a bit more. Per Martin in the nom I mention, take a look at Sebastião Salgado's photos/editing and see what you think. --Cart (talk) 12:17, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Cart and Basile Morin I am particularly a fan of Sebastião Salgado, he is very recognized in Brazil. I have tried to take your recommendations highlighting people but without falling into the overprocessed. Obviously the film development is much more real and beautiful, I also have doubts about whether Sebastian was really using edition after taking his photos or simply played with the light that was at the time of taking the picture. BTW, I would like to hear your opinions regarding this new version, thank you very much --Wilfredor (talk) 15:10, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Neutral now -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:30, 29 February 2020 (UTC) vote updated after the reverted version -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:20, 29 February 2020 (UTC) Cache problem probably, this version is not overprocessed in my opinion. But the light is not excellent -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:20, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment In my opinion, some of Salgado's work is overprocessed as well (David Yarrow is another example btw.) --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 17:57, 29 February 2020 (UTC) (Wilfredor: your first version resembled that style more closely)[reply]
Agreed. I think we were not so far apart in the first place (see my comment below). I find my own photography soulless. A price that I paid for earning a couple of stars here. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 21:20, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I beg to differ, you have some very good shots. You are always welcome to join me on the Dark Side of FPC. If you can stand a lot of opposes. ;-D --Cart (talk) 22:37, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hehe, dark side sounds promising! But seriously, I don't like how this process here locks me in. That's why I stopped nominating my own pictures a while ago. Now, I might warm up to the idea of clean and somewhat boring documentary-style images again. But for now I just enjoy seeing something fresh appear on this page occasionally. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 23:01, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
CartThis version was the original nomination, what do you think of this version? --Wilfredor (talk) 15:37, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not too fond of that either. The processing brings out details, but it ends up looking almost like an ink drawing. You need a delicate touch to make this work. --Cart (talk) 15:45, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Very good image of high documentary value.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:30, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment To me, the question at hand is not so much about the processing, but about the composition. Many good black-and-white images work because the photographer has used the contrast of different subjects in a scene in a smart way. To me, the above image contains too many elements that closely resemble their background, e.g. the people on the right. I also find this image a bit too cluttered (unless that's intended), which makes it too busy for my taste. Best, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 18:06, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The chaos of the amount of elements represents in itself the chaos that it sought to represent, which in turn is the chaos in the day, in the minds of these people and observing Frank's comment, I think that at this point I will upload a photo with the contrast that I want to show, I respect the opinions expressed here, however, I think that it has entered a more artistic than technical terrain, so, I will Keep the contrast that I wanted to show in the beginning with all due respect, especially to Basile Morin comment and maybe you might want to change your vote oppose. Thanks --Wilfredor (talk) 18:12, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I support that approach, Wilfredo. Do what you think is the best. The feedback here on Commons often has the tendency of suppressing any style. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 21:17, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:31, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People#Others
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Recife,_the_Brazilian_capital_of_social_inequality.jpg&oldid=402880152"