Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2024 at 19:48:50 (UTC)
Reason
Has anyone ever tried a 3D model nomination here? I haven't seen one, and I figured 3DBenchy would be a worthy attempt. 3DBenchy is a calibration object designed to stress test 3D printers. It is open-source and (in certain circles) quite famous. If you prefer to grade it purely as an image, the largest 2D preview is well over the minimum pixel count and the underlying file is almost 11 MB.
A thought crossed my mind that what we really need is a wiki project called Featured Multimedia, which could handle all the file types that aren't images (and perhaps videos, since Featured Pictures has a prior claim on those). I discovered there wasWikipedia:Featured sounds, but it's been dormant since 2011. That catalog would make a good starting point for Featured Multimedia. Moonreach (talk) 20:42, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I worry about the licensing situation with the teapot. Our copy is tagged CC, but it's a recreation of someone else's 3D model, which is in turn a recreation of a commercial article. It's possible the pathway is still clear - I don't know what the college's license is, and I believe in the US functional items can't have their designs copyrighted, but that's still more hoops than I want to jump through. Moonreach (talk) 15:36, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – If we're going to start allowing 3D models into FP, then we may aswell rename it from Featured Pictures to Featured Media ―Howard • 🌽3308:46, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See my comment above - I wonder if there is enough interest (and enough such material) that a separate project might be worthwhile. I would estimate that all sounds, videos and 3D objects in Commons are still lesser in number than all the pictures, but they still represent a substantial amount of the media Wikimedia has to offer. Moonreach (talk) 15:59, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This is a nice 3D model. As far as I can tell, the pixellation is entirely the fault of the Mediawiki viewer and not the file itself. Toadspike[Talk]22:52, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2024 at 20:57:30 (UTC)
Reason
No single cover can fully encapsulate pulp magazines, but this one has a lot of good stuff: A spaceman with a jetpack and a raygun carrying an improbably dressed woman, while in the background some kind of futuristic machine explodes. The scan quality is good, and captures the halftone printing dots, which are functionally the resolution limit of the source image. I did a light crop to remove a white line on the right side, but I don't want to get too crop-happy, since this is a time-worn physical object and has somewhat uneven edges because of it.
Definitely agree that EV could be an issue. We have numerous FAs on pulp magazines, to use one that doesn't have an article to represent the genre would be problematic. Having an article on Planet Stories would ameliorate that concern. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:15, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I talked it over with them and put it in a different spot on the page that they suggested. I don't know if the article will prove stable or not, but it's back in for now, and it is stable on the other pages. Moonreach (talk) 19:37, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I think that, with a consensus to keep the image in the article, the stability criterion should be fulfilled. Just as a note, my concern was not that an item should not represent its class; rather, I think that class representation would best be done by a work that is discussed in detail by an article on the class. In this case, Planet Stories was one of a list of publications from the peak of the genre's popularity, as opposed to (say) The Popular Magazine, which is discussed in detail. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 21:29, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Quite OK, but the resolution is just good enough. I also see one scratch which should be corrected (see the note on Commons). Surprisingly, this version seems not to be indexed on Tineye. Yann (talk) 17:05, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
True, but the Eurasian chaffinch photo is almost square shaped, so the empty space at the top is less noticeable. That bird's tail is also higher up compared with the Blue-throated barbet. This bird on the other hand and the branch it's on appear oddly low in the image, an issue that becomes evident if you view the image on fullscreen (compounded by the fact that the image is vertical). The tail to head distance and the position of the bird just seem a bit off. Reducing the top by about 1/4 or 1/3 could solve this issue in my opinion. Regards, Nythar (💬-🍀) 04:16, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done Fair enough. I've cropped it for more uniform space on all sides. Uploaded with a "crop" filename as the original is QI and FP on Commons. --Tagooty (talk) 09:14, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it could go slightly further. Using Photoshop's rulers, I'm seeing that the head has 175px more space than the tail. The left-right margins are also unabalanced, but in that case there are branches and whatnot that allow the eye to follow. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:13, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Having the head a little closer to the middle of the image than the tail is justified for 2 reasons: From the aesthetic PoV, an unbalanced layout is more appealing than geometric balance. From the EV PoV, the most interesting part of the bird is the multi-coloured head, neck and bill (see Description). Tagooty (talk) 03:32, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2024 at 13:36:20 (UTC)
Reason
High EV, a very rare image of an extremely violent weather event, one of the higest-quality images I've ever seen of a tornado overall. FP on Commons, Indonesian Wiki and Turkish Wiki. Used in 70 pages just on the English Wikipedia.
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2024 at 15:22:17 (UTC)
Reason
High quality scan of a piece of newspaper art. The murder of Wang Lianying, a famed courtesan, captured imaginations in Shanghai, and the case was even reported in the international press. This image, which accompanied coverage of the trial in the New York Tribune, illustrates that international coverage; it also provides an early example of artwork by Jefferson Machamer, who developed a reputation for depicting glamourous women.
Comment – Too soon? The image was put in the article yesterday. I think it will be stable so, conditionalSupport, assuming it's stable at the end of this nomination. Bammesk (talk) 20:02, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Considering the murder article didn't exist until yesterday (was moved to main space, drafted starting two days ago), I don't think it violates the spirit of the stability criterion. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 20:04, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's not really horizon. Just layers of mountains (horizon would be past the mountains). I understand if you don't like it. Bammesk (talk) 03:10, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – All the lines that should be vertical (the dome aperture, the silo-type things) are. I think the mountains really do just slope downward like that. Moonreach (talk) 16:33, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I double-checked, and the silos aren't truly vertical, although they're close. The exterior vertical elements on the observatory base are, though. It's possible that there really is a tilt here, but if there is, it's much more subtle that then horizon line suggests. Moonreach (talk) 19:41, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To illustrate the camera rotation in this photo as per discussion above, I don't have a lens correction profile for the drone used here, so the perspective lines won't quite match. ro|3ek (talk) 13:23, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I disagree. The camera is pointing northeast. Google Earth here and here and the elevation map here confirm that's the natural slope of the mountains. In the screenshots, the observatory is at the center of the red circles. Some mountainous skylines just aren't horizontal. Bammesk (talk) 01:14, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Nov 2024 at 12:48:47 (UTC)
Reason
my first Featured picture nomination since, you know, that thing, however the reason I'm nominate this movie, it's becaused it is one of the most well know Charlie Chaplin movies and also, is the one of two chaplin movies to win an oscar
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Nov 2024 at 13:17:30 (UTC)
Reason
A really good image of the events, it shows the chaos and has relatively high EV. Framing is also good. It definitely catches my eye whenever I read the article. May need slight perspective correction, but I believe the image is supposed to line up with the man, and not the other objects, which makes sense.
Support - Interesting scene. Looks a bit lazy at 5 a.m. in the morning and seemingly sort of staged because of that. The person’s gaze is definitely uneasy. All in all, good composition and a nice piece of photojournalism. --Argenberg (talk) 10:51, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Nov 2024 at 18:16:15 (UTC)
Reason
Shooting the brightest light source is a challenge. Capturing a solar diffraction spike in the context of an urban canyon at the golden hour was a particular challenge for me. In order to execute this image, I undertook my first attempt at bracketing and compositing. On the day I shot, I executed about a half dozen different 7-picture autobracketing sequences with full-stop increments from -3 to +3 in under 10 minutes on this camera while the sun was visible in this urban canyon. I prefer this one because the sunburst/diffraction spike has an appealling shape (especially in article space thumbs). Furthermore, in this sequence the rare double-bladed spikes are uniform throughout the scene. I composited it using free Canon software that is limited to 3 source files. Since I metered to the main subject, I ended up relying on the overexposed sequence elements to composite. The best result here uses the +1- and +3-stop sequence elements. It is slightly better than +1/+2/+3 and +2/+3 versions that are also on commons. I apologize that I cropped out so many pixels, but at the time I only had one good tripod for a three camera setup and this camera was hanging off of another camera at a 15+ degree tilt. For a first attempt at bracketing/compositing with free software, this is a pretty solid result. I think this diffraction spike really pops in thumbnail size that you see in article space.
Looks like you've put a lot of effort into planning of the shoot. It can get stressful when you're time constrained like in this case. The problem is that the photo is not a great illustration of an urban canyon. The buildings on the left are only 3 storey high. See Manhattanhenge for comparison. It also doesn't quite work as an illustration of the golden hour. All the buildings are backlit and therefore in the shadow so you're not showing what the red light does to the landscape.ro|3ek (talk) 22:55, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User:Robek, this was actually a practice session two days before Chicagohenge, which turned out to have bad weather this year. You have educated me on the golden hour. Your point about the buildings being backlit is certainly true, but the red light is quite visible on the street surface. On the left between the Hotel Del Prado in the foreground and the Hyde Park–Kenwood National Bank Building off in the distance are 3 story buildings. However, if you read the urban canyon article this is defined as an Avenue canyon in the 3 story stretches and a regular or deep canyon in other stretches. On the 2nd of the two actual days of Chicagohenge 3 days later, I went downtown to photograph deep canyons. I was amid deeper canyons, but the diffraction spikes were less presentable. The diffraction spike is actually the focus of the image. I have reordered the article usage in this regard moving diff spike to first.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:56, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. the point of Xhenge photography is to show the beauty of the sunset or sunrise in the context of architecture. None of the sun photos in Manhattanhenge article show a particularly artistic sun. Most of them are just glowing masses. This nomination presents a splendid diffraction spike. Except for maybe one red presentation, I don't think Manhattanhenge has good sun presentations. The article does present the crowd gatherings in all their glory. However, I had better red rings with my longest lens on another camera, because I had concentric red rings around the sun rather than that. I do aspire to get more picturesque results in deeper canyons in future years.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:21, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment — I know you're trying really hard to make this image work, but this copy has washed-out blacks at the bottom, which the others didn't. Moonreach (talk) 16:28, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't agree with calling it "washed-out blacks". Because this copy has more detail in the darker areas than the other versions (compare at same magnification). Ansel Adams had his own unconventional developing and printing techniques. So his highlights and blacks aren't always conventional. I am not an expert but that's what I've read about him. Bammesk (talk) 01:40, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I edited the image and uploaded Alt 1, per Janke (restored spots) and per Moonreach (adjusted darker levels at the bottom). In the nom version (Original), the darker levels are noticeably brighter at the bottom. That's not the case in these versions: [1][2][3]. Looking at other images at the source link [4], these are prints, and in some scans light leaks around the edges throwing off the darker levels, examples [5][6]. I think that explains it and justifies adjusting the levels at the bottom of the nom image. On a different note: I think Library of Congress has a higher resolution scan, but does not allow downloads because of copyright, even though publication was 1927 and copyright has expired. We can do a "delist and replace" nom when the LOC copy becomes available. Support Alt 1. Bammesk (talk) 19:14, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2024 at 18:03:57 (UTC)
Reason
High EV, while it may be a little hard to understand what's happening at first, it is an invaluable asset of tornado research. Probably the best animated GIF showing the entire cycle of a tornado's life. An image of tornado itself can be found here. This Doppler image of the horrific 2011 Joplin tornado also is of high quality and EV, although this image fits better as it is a GIF.
Support – Just a sidenote, the image captions in the articles have details that are missing in the image page description. The image page description can be improved? Bammesk (talk) 02:13, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2024 at 23:31:50 (UTC)
Reason
High quality and historical image showing the first launch from Cape Canaveral in 1950 of a V-2 Rocket, which led to the beginning of the U.S. being interested in space travel and the Space Age. It was (as the description of the image on Wikipedia says) truly the start of a new chapter.
Comment – Interesting historically that the U.S. was still using V-2s seven years after production began in nazi Germany – showing how advanced technically it was. Later in WWII many were built by slave labor. – Sca (talk) 15:08, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Nov 2024 at 01:19:10 (UTC)
Reason
High quality for it's time and a rare color photo taken during WW2, showing the aftermath of a very historically important event: the German Invasion of Poland which started World War II
Oppose. The photo doesn't really convey the moment; it took me a bit to even realize the glass was broken. Otherwise it's just a shot of a building and a flag. – Moonreach (talk) 19:03, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, for several separate reasons. The first is that this has analog artifacting that suggests it was transferred to (and later from) a tape; the second is digital artifacting, such as excess compression and combing. The third is more nuanced: I'm worried about the accuracy of this, given that it's an American artist's conception of an event that was known exclusively through reports by the Soviet Union, an entity with both the motive and habit of lying. To present this as a featured picture would, I think, be tantamount to endorsing it as factual, something we can't verify. I think it's a neat piece of history, but I don't think it makes the grade for featured picture. Moonreach (talk) 15:31, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Nov 2024 at 20:54:37 (UTC)
Reason
A high quality iconic photo which shows LBJ with Vietnam Troops. The photo is synonymous with LBJ's role in Vietnam sending Americans to fight in the war
Comment: Limited EV, as the medal is barely visible and the LBJ article doesn't mention his visit at all. Also, Wcamp9, you're making an awful lot of nominations—eight in the span of two days. Please consider slowing down so as not to flood the whole FPC page. --Paul_012 (talk) 23:23, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There was a discussion some time ago that a maximum of 4 noms by one user would be an appropriate number. When old noms drop from the list, new ones can be added. --Janke | Talk09:42, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support — I agree the EV is borderline, but this is a good-quality copy of a well-composed photo, and the subject of a president conducting one of the duties of his office is worth something, I think. Moonreach (talk) 18:59, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]