Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Heeni Hirini and child

Heeni Hirini and child[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Dec 2016 at 10:16:13 (UTC)

Reason: well-known image in New Zealand by an early portrait artist who specialised in portraits of Maori people. There is another version of this image which shows the cloak as white, however this one is more authentic (more similar to the colours of the actual painting).
Articles in which this image appears: Gottfried Lindauer
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
Creator: Gottfried Lindauer

Support as nominator – MurielMary (talk) 10:16, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support --PetarM (talk) 15:11, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain + Comment -- Could benefit from a bit of brightness/gamma correction... --Janke | Talk 17:07, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Jobas (talk) 18:33, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful painting. As Janke says, some brightening would be a definite improvement. lNeverCry 23:16, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – the image is not used in any article, nomination fails criteria 5. Also, the source image [1] is 1020x1273 pixels and 208KB, less than the 1500px minimum requirement criteria 2. Bammesk (talk) 01:48, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Look closer: Original file ‎(1,603 × 2,000 pixels, file size: 632 KB, MIME type: image/jpeg) --Janke | Talk 08:21, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - I saw that but the source image I was referring to is the one here: [2]. The upload can be a scaled image, I am not saying it is, just that it could be. Bammesk (talk) 03:00, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    - Not possible, I don't think - look in the hair and at the canvas - there's pixel-level detail there which wouldn't be possible in a scaled-up image. It's clearly the same photograph but must have been scaled down on the website. TSP (talk) 14:53, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- The other version of this image is used in the Gottfried Lindauer article. I can swap it out so this one is in the article. MurielMary (talk) 09:50, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Hmm FYI seems that there is some discussion over which version of this painting should be in the Lindauer article, so will just let that discussion proceed. If this version, the nom stands, if the other version then I will nominate the other version here. MurielMary (talk) 20:29, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Following discussion, it transpires that another version of this painting is preferred for the Lindauer article. So at this stage the image doesn't appear on a WP article and therefore doesn't meet the FP criteria. MurielMary (talk) 21:54, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Not used in any article, no EV for image. Mattximus (talk) 00:07, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as above. Sorry. This file is not used in any articles, and its counterpart is used only in a gallery in a very heavily illustrated (though short) article. There are also questions to be asked about the source of this file, as suggested in the conversation above. That said, the subject matter is excellent, and I would very much like to support something like this in the future. Josh Milburn (talk) 01:20, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - re 'There is another version of this image which shows the cloak as white, however this one is more authentic (more similar to the colours of the actual painting)' - they're not the same painting. Note the different detail on the cloak particularly. This article estimates that Lindauer painted this subject up to 30 times. This doesn't necessarily swing the vote one way or the other, but seemed relevant to note. TSP (talk) 14:53, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thanks, I later realised that comment of mine was inaccurate (should have gone back and corrected it). MurielMary (talk) 22:29, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 12:49, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]