Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Solvay conference 1927.jpg

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

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2011 at 16:21:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
It's a historical image and I think we can make exception for historical images. resolution of image is satisfying. 17 people of this image are noble laureates Amir (talk) 17:52, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well that's why we also have "Valued Images" : for those historical images that are indeed of great value but that are (objectively) not of great photographic quality. Nominate it as Valued Image and I'll support it. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 19:24, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks but I don't think so because this or this are featured but they (and major of these images) have not "quality and resolution"Amir (talk) 20:11, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Tomer T (talk) 19:28, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment The technical quality is not the only criterium for a FP. It may be. Old images, even with a non perfect quality, can be promotted as FP. We have many examples. FPC are not to be technically better than QI. VI was not created for historical images. Even if it may concern historical images. Please read the guidelines (both for QI, VI and FP) carefully.--Jebulon (talk) 17:09, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I wasn't meaning that VI was created for historical pictures. I meant that its purpose was (partly) to award some label to pictures that could be of great value without being of great photographic quality. I agree that some historical pictures can be FP even with not so great quality or resolution (especially because we have to consider the technology of that time). But for that particular picture I think FP is a bit too much for two main reasons : 1) I think we can expect a better resolution and focus for that period (and that 1925 picture is an example of what I mean - you can actually see that the photographic conditions were not as good as the 1927 Sovay one, which makes the latter, by comparison, not so good) ; 2) I don't think the composition is of great quality (at least not enough for FP). So yes, I understand the guidelines and yes I stay with my opinion. Sorry. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 17:25, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    If "especially considering the technology of that time" the very analogue image used for digitisation provides more detail and contrast than many modern high end DSLR images could provide. It's the scanning that limits the quality you get displayed in the digital file. Resolution of a digital file is not connected to the period of an alogue image. It's the original image's size and the scanning method used to digitise the image that determine the resolution you can see. The only thing that is "not so good" is the idea of comparing two digitised analogue images from the same period without any technical intel. We don't have any information on the cameras, lenses, photographic film and paper nor any intel on the darkroom processing. The beauty and quality of the 1925 may be higher - yet your argumentation falls short for the aforementioned reasons. Regards, PETER WEIS TALK 08:46, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support outstanding historic value and uniqueness. Regards, PETER WEIS TALK 08:46, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment PD for 70 years after publication does not comply with Belgian copyright law. Unless Benjamin Couprie is dead for 70 years (i.e. complies with PD for 70 years pma), or the image is provided by his legal successors, this image is still under copyright. Regards, PETER WEIS TALK 08:46, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    hmm. Do you know when Benjamin Couprie died? I think he must died before 1941 because he was in the 1911 conference [1]. I googled his name but I can't find his date deathAmir (talk) 11:31, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    As Here he has been died since 1933 thus this image PDAmir (talk) 12:48, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    That says he died after 1933 (and was born before 1911), which we know because of pictures he took at the First and Seventh Solvay Conferences, in 1911 and 1933 respectively. This doesn't seem like very conclusive evidence that he died by 1940 (as required for it to be PD in Belgium under the 70 years pma rule). --Avenue (talk) 13:17, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Anyway, regardless of whether this is currently PD in Belgium, it doesn't seem to be PD in the US because it was published after 1922 and was not PD in Belgium on 1 January 1996 (see w:Wikipedia:Non-U.S. copyrights for why that date is important). It was created by someone still alive in 1926, and Belgium had the 70 year pma rule in 1996 (their current law was passed in 1994). I hope I'm missing something, but I think all his photos post-1922 are unfortunately still under copyright in the U.S., and so should be deleted. --Avenue (talk) 13:46, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Outstanding value and uniqueness, I agree. No need to be a specialist of physics to understand that the meeting on a same picture (even if not technically perfect) of so world famous scientists is absolutely extraordinary. Typical for FP in my poor opinion.--Jebulon (talk) 16:08, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Poor quality. พ.s. 22:35, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose, still under copyright. --Avenue (talk) 13:50, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support considering the age of the photo Ggia (talk) 20:47, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Imehling (talk) 10:04, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment As Avenue wrote it, there could be a problem with Benjamin Couprie's photographs. I'm trying to find some informations about his date of death but I haven't found anything yet. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 15:48, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 06:45, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Solvay_conference_1927.jpg&oldid=60652839"