Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Isabella Lövin signing climate law referral.jpg

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

File:Isabella Lövin signing climate law referral.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Mar 2018 at 14:06:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Isabella Lövin signing climate law referral
  • I was wondering if someone would notice the curve :-), it matches the curve of the table so that the ceiling becomes like a "mirror image" of the table. An unusual and very good photo. --cart-Talk 20:02, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Absolutely correct perspective was probably not what was most important for the photographer when creating this photo. Any perspective correction would completely ruin the comopsition and it's not important to do such in a photo like this. It is better to have the people depicted in a good way than worry about the proportions of a partial painting in the background. (See almost any photo from the Oval Office.) Like with other famous photos, we have to live the inherent imperfections in them. --cart-Talk 10:45, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is no "distortion" and the "perspective" is "correct". If you stood where the camera was, looking with one eye, this is what you'd see. There are conventions surrounding architectural and interior building photography that the camera should be level, perpendicular to the facing wall, and the angle of view not too extreme. They are conventions that tend to produce pleasing results for photographs where the subject has straight lines at 90° to each other. Here, the subject is a group of people, and if you are concentrating on the verticals of the door or painting, then you aren't really looking properly. We had this complaint at File:Khandoba temple Pune.jpg, where the subject is the worshipers, and it went on to win 1st prize in WLM. Where do you look in this photo: File:Marilyn Monroe photo pose Seven Year Itch.jpg ;-) -- Colin (talk) 11:36, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Please don't tell me that I'm not "really looking properly". That's patronising. In this image the camera is not "perpendicular to the facing wall". Easily corrected. An important image, but not FP. Charles (talk) 19:53, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Charles, could you consider, perhaps, that you are wrong? Enough neutrality: reviews like this are embarrassing. Please go to Pete Souza's Flickr Stream and examine the photos. Some are level, many are not. Many of his greatest photos are not. It is telling that this photo was published as-is by newspapers ([1], [2], [3], [4], etc) but when reviewed at FPC, we ended up with this rotated crop. Only on Commons does anyone worry that the door frame is not vertical. Only on Commons. *sigh*. The picture editors at all these newspapers [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12] didn't feel the need to "correct" the verticals before publishing the photo we are reviewing here. Anyone here taken a photo that's gone viral, viewed by millions, and published in newspapers round the world? No, thought not. So a bird and insect photographer thinks all the world's newspaper photo editors, and Souza, arguably the best political event photographer of this century, are making a newbie, easily corrected, mistake? You are not really looking properly. -- Colin (talk) 20:54, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "No, thought not."? Wrong actually, Colin. One of my 'bird and insect photographs' was used by the Indian Postal Services on a postage stamp and so has been viewed by many more people than this nominated image. But that's beside the point and mentioned only in response to Colin's rant. I didn't write the FP guidelines which state "Images should not be unintentionally tilted". We are not a newspaper. Voters here are not newspaper editors. And Colin, you should not conclude that I can only take insect and bird images, just because I choose to only submit animal photos to Wikimedia. Charles (talk) 21:23, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Congratulations on your stamp, Charles, but it isn't actually what I meant or said. Your photo didn't "go viral". People didn't think it so meaningful that they forwarded it to their friends with a comment. This image achieved notability -- it was talked about as a photograph, not as so many pixels. Various, independent, newspaper picture editors selects it as a newsworthy image. It wasn't discussed because artistically or technically it was great, though it is perfectly fine, but for what it said. So, no, I don't think anyone where has taken a photo that meant anything. Not a diddly squat. Your bird stamp is a great achievement, but isn't a comment on Trump vs Lövin approach to government, or anything else. This photo is great because of what it says, not because of any of the tedious factors listed in our FPC guidelines. This is just a repeat of the Obama "is my hair like your hair" photo, where Commons embarrases itself by looking at pixels and not the picture. We fail to reliably recognise great photos. If the FP guidelines are being followed so rigidly by some, and you are not alone in becoming a robot wrt such things as noise or CA, then it truely is time to scrap them. They are, in my experience, only ever mentioned by folk defending wrongheaded reviews. -- Colin (talk) 09:32, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 03:41, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical#1990- Now
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Isabella_Lövin_signing_climate_law_referral.jpg&oldid=290785599"