Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:William-Adolphe Bouguereau (1825-1905) - Sewing (1898) Edit.jpg

Info created by William-Adolphe Bouguereau, nominated by Laitche -- Laitche 17:12, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Laitche 17:12, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There's a smudge on her nose that looks like dirt on the scanner. Can it be removed? Also, the saturation levels seem just a smidgen lower than they ought to be - it's meant to be fairly light, but I think this is just a teensy bit too light. Adam Cuerden 08:11, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unsharp and noisy. Sorry --Beyond silence 23:13, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 1 support, 1 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 14:07, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Info Saturation increased slightly, smudge on nose removed. Converted to png as repeatedly saving to jpg can result in loss of info.
Support Adam Cuerden 08:27, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unsharp and noisy. Sorry --Beyond silence 23:13, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 1 support, 1 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 14:06, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Info I removed dirts and scratches. -- Laitche 17:04, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Laitche 17:04, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jaakobou 18:28, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Durova 09:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Though I'd still like to up the saturation a smidgen. Adam Cuerden 13:59, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unsharp and noisy. Sorry --Beyond silence 23:13, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Vanrip 09:10, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I have a problem with featuring photographs of paintings where there is no proof of the authenticity of the colour reproduction (e.g. with a second picture including a standard colour card). The comment of Adam Cuerden here above says enough. Lycaon 07:09, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good reproduction by well-known artist. Freedom to share 19:01, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How do you know it is a good reproduction? How can you tell? Lycaon 19:42, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's good from a technical standpoint imo. Sharp, detailed etc. Freedom to share 13:12, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 5 support, 2 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 14:06, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Info The original seemed a bit greyish, I upped the saturation a little bit to bring out the flesh tones. Adam Cuerden 15:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden 15:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Better but unsharp and noisy. Sorry --Beyond silence 23:13, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good edit. Vanrip 09:10, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 1 support, 1 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 13:59, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Contents