Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/EdsonMikeRed.jpg
- Reason
- I think its a good quality picture and meets the criteria
- Articles this image appears in
- Guadalcanal Campaign, Merritt A. Edson
- Creator
- Looper5920 Uploaded the image
- Support as nominator --Kumioko (talk) 02:55, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose. Blown whites, source link returns 404 error. Durova280 04:39, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. MER-C 06:56, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- Not sure what blown whites means but here is the correct link. [1] --Kumioko (talk) 13:03, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- See the upper left corner where the image goes completely white? With an image of this age that effect is usually the result of poor image processing. Such as attempting to brighten the image to correct for fade, without really going in and putting much time or attention into it. Sad to see that because the original has good composition and a better digital file might be worth featuring. If you'd like to write to the hosting institution and ask for a better scan, that might help. I'll volunteer to do a courtesy restoration if they supply a good quality image file: minimum 10MB in uncompressed TIFF or PNG format with no scanner streaks. Durova280 17:12, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the invitation to assist, I doubt they have a better one but I will see what I can find. --Kumioko (talk) 17:23, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- Sometimes an institution is willing to do a new scan if they understand there's a possibility an item from their collection could be selected to run on Wikipedia's main page. You can assure them that they will receive source credit, with a link back to their website. Durova280 22:44, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the invitation to assist, I doubt they have a better one but I will see what I can find. --Kumioko (talk) 17:23, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- Here's a little more info on blown out whites. You may also want to have a look at this and this, too. wadester16 15:27, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
- See the upper left corner where the image goes completely white? With an image of this age that effect is usually the result of poor image processing. Such as attempting to brighten the image to correct for fade, without really going in and putting much time or attention into it. Sad to see that because the original has good composition and a better digital file might be worth featuring. If you'd like to write to the hosting institution and ask for a better scan, that might help. I'll volunteer to do a courtesy restoration if they supply a good quality image file: minimum 10MB in uncompressed TIFF or PNG format with no scanner streaks. Durova280 17:12, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. Noodle snacks (talk) 09:32, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Not promoted --Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 10:31, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
