Wikimedia Commons

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:John Meintz, punished during World War I - NARA - 283633 - restored.jpg

< Commons:Featured picture candidates

File:John Meintz, punished during World War I - NARA - 283633 - restored.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Oct 2016 at 15:25:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
I was talking about original image with the "restoration" comparison, the new image look IMHO artificially contrasted killing detail information in shadows --The Photographer 22:08, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Got it. Well, yes, the shadows are darker, but what information was there in the shadows? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:04, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Opencooper and Ikan. Shadow/Highlight adjustment works by reducing contrast and to adjust the range of tonal values that will be affected by this adjustment, use the Tonal Width slider. A low value causes only a limited range of tonal values within the image to be affected, whereas a high value allows the adjustment to apply to a wider range. In other words, you expand or contract the area to be adjusted by defining a tonal range. The Amount slider for Highlights provides a similar ability to darken the brightest areas. Your first reaction may be that doing so simply reduces contrast and produces a muddy image. Dynamic range is of considerable importance to image quality in both the digital and emulsion domain. Both film and digital sensors exhibit non-linear responses to the amount of light, and at the edges of the dynamic range, close to underexposure and overexposure the media will exhibit particularly non-linear responses. The non-linear dynamic response or saturation qualities of emulsion film are often considered a desirable effect by photographers, and the distortion of colour, contrast and brightness varies considerably between film stocks. There is no limit to the number of possible levels of colour on emulsion film, whereas a digital sensor stores integer numbers, producing a limited and specific possible number of colours. Banding may be visible in the unusual case that it is not obscured by noise, and detail may be lost, particularly in shadow and highlight areas. BTW, you could use use burn for shadows (See more) --The Photographer 11:41, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
digression about Karelj's posture
    • @Karelj: Can you please be more specific about your oppose? I put a bunch of time and effort into restoring this image (of course, voluntarily) and getting feedback of "disgust" isn't really the most encouraging. 20:22, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
OK, this image a has graet historic value and it should be in Wikimdmia Commons archive without any doubt. But it has no place in the Featured picture candidates page, because the featured picture should have also some aestetic level and the tarred-and-feathered half-naked man is not in this category. What do you plan to nominate next time? Child without head, elefant excrements...? --Karelj (talk) 21:52, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There are definitely some FPs with historic/documentary value that have little or none aesthetic level, such as this. And as for unappetizing things, we recently featured this. cart-Talk 22:38, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Karelj, It's important take a look in the rules section of this page, let me do it more easy for you:

A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate (which has been carefully selected by the author/nominator). English is the most widely understood language on Commons, but any language may be used in your review. A helpful review will often reference one or more of the criteria listed above.

Unhelpful reasons for opposing include
  • No reason
  • "I don't like it" and other empty assessments
  • "You can do better" and other criticisms of the author/nominator rather than the image

Btw, be careful with your comments tactless and surliness or lack of politeness, I do not want to see it blocked because of this. Thanks --The Photographer 01:29, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  •   Comment I've reuploaded a version of the image that is minimally leveled from the original. This time no information should be lost in the shadows. I realize now that the image didn't need so much overcontrasting. Let me know if there are any issues or if you can do a more experienced adjustment, thanks. Opencooper (talk) 20:22, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative edit

I think that the original with all the scratches and dust give us more, however if we will do a restoration, I prefer to treat the photo with another approach:

 

Now we can see more of the eye, and the subject pops-up a little bit more from the background. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 14:56, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  •   Oppose - You're right that you have improved upon the original, at least in the condition it's now in. But this is not a restoration, as you have greatly brightened the picture. So if the point is to restore a historical photo while respecting the choices the original photographer made, I don't think this does it. Also, your version still has a bunch of scratches and other damage in it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:48, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ikan Kekek "no-one else even commented" that's why for me was a wast of time, not our discussion. Got it? -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 20:19, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying. I was reading your remark as an insult. So no harm done. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:49, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 05:18, 22 October 2016 (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:John_Meintz,_punished_during_World_War_I_-_NARA_-_283633_-_restored.jpg&oldid=210460121"