Commons:Valued image candidates/6,99Mo-Giorgione 019.jpg

6,99Mo-Giorgione 019.jpg

promoted

Image
Nominated by	Ismoon (talk) on 2018-03-05 10:48 (UTC)
Scope	Nominated as the most valued image on Commons within the scope: The Tempest by Giorgione
Used in	Global usage Peinture de paysage, Giorgione, La Tempête (Giorgione) and École vénitienne (peinture)
Reason	Today the image that is imposed by the community's previous vote (Commons: Valued images) is the file: Accademia - La tempesta - Giorgione.jpg. This image certainly gives detailed information, but all the authors who analyzed this painting are more interested in the subject, identifiable, in this case, without a great definition of detail. The novelty of Giorgione, in the Venetian school, is mainly due to its treatment of color, as colorito, ie thin layers of paint that merge into an overall harmony corresponding to a certain softly colored light. I just contributed to the article Peinture de paysage, Giorgione, La Tempête (Giorgione) and École vénitienne (peinture). A good quality image is needed. But our previously award-winning photo is sorely lacking in this colorful subtlety. We can even say, as soon as we have seen once the painting and not its reproduction, that its colors are false. Compared to the other views, available on Commons, it can no longer be considered the image of greater value. I would like a new vote to be proposed. The file: 6,99Mo-Giorgione_019.jpg seems much better, and it is less heavy to download, by the way. -- Ismoon (talk)
Review (criteria)	Comment I tried to fix your VIC. The scope must be linked to a category through. -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 03:40, 27 February 2018 (UTC)  Comment It is very healthy to put the labels into play. For that one has to go through the procedure Pending Most valued review candidates. Your image dates, like many, from before the last restoration. There is obviously an error in the caption. Keep in mind that everything we do has a traceability on Wiki. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:36, 27 February 2018 (UTC)  Comment - Ismoon, thanks for linking the scope, but since there's already a VI in this scope, you need to have a Most Valued Review, pitting the current VI against your nominee. If you look at the bottom of the page, you can see how it's done. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:23, 5 March 2018 (UTC)  Support Seems preferable to the other one, which has always seemed too light/glary to me. There would be a case for using both in articles on the painting. The real sources for both are rather unclear. -- Johnbod (talk) 13:00, 5 March 2018 (UTC)  Support Although I'm not at all familiar with the technicalities of image reviewing, I do wish to share my complete approbation re. Ismoon's nomination: this image is simply much closer to reality. The other one, with its highly contrasted blues and greens, is completely at odds with the real thing. --Frédéric-FR (talk) 16:59, 5 March 2018 (UTC)  Support I would support between the two on the realism compared above but I agree with Ikan, this needs to be put in a Most Valued Review between the current nomination and the existing VI. Should this just be closed and a new Most Valued Review Nomination started? -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 17:32, 5 March 2018 (UTC) Scores: 1. 6,99Mo-Giorgione 019.jpg: +3 <-- 2. Accademia - La tempesta - Giorgione.jpg: 0 (current VI within same scope) => File:6,99Mo-Giorgione 019.jpg: Promoted. <-- File:Accademia - La tempesta - Giorgione.jpg: Declined and demoted to VI-former. ---- DeFacto (talk). 19:32, 19 March 2018 (UTC)