Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Jules Massenet by Eugène Pirou.jpg

File:Jules Massenet by Eugène Pirou.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2016 at 05:45:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
Info created by w:Eugène Pirou - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 05:45, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Info This type of photography tends to be a bit light. Upped the contrast slightly to account for fading, but, in the end, this isn't a modern photo, it's a 19th century carte de visite. Adam Cuerden (talk) 05:47, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 05:45, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:31, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Yeah, it's really fading at the bottom, but it's still a good carte de visite in very good condition, and of obvious historical importance. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:25, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @Ikan Kekek: And one doesn't want to over-restore - I put a lot of work into the bottom (the lighter patches are selectively darkened a bit, for instance) but past a certain point you're just drawing on the photo. I blame people holding the card and getting greasy fingers on the bottom of the photo. I might poke at it a little more, see if I can mitigate it further, though. Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:37, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good work. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 12:26, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Some red/pink pixellization near the moustache. My kind of work for these pictures is a little different (I desaturate, and I increase the contrast, a bit more), anyway this one is excellent and of great value. For those who are interested by trying by themselves, please upload first the intact original, useful for further restorations (As Adam and I do).--Jebulon (talk) 13:32, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 15:18, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose thanks Adam Cuerden for your nice work, but sorry, this image is bleached out. This can be also simply digitaly corrected. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 16:24, 7 January 2016 (UTC) P.S: a simply additional photoshop tonality correction show me this: [reply]

[unindent] Comment Doesn't that have too much color? It looks a little blue to me, and this is a black & white (OK, sepia toned - I take Jebulon's point) image. Am I seeing something that isn't there? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:01, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

- @Alchemist-hp and Livioandronico2013: I can understand your view, but I think it is possible to over-correct, especially with the carte de visit mount. Remember that this is also an example of the photographer's work, so we need to reflect the techniques used. Now, useability is also a criterion, and there will have been some fading over time; I myself darkened the image a bit. But, if this is going to be at all reflective of the photographer's work, it can't mislead as to which techniques were used, and that means greyscaling is definitely inappropriate, I fear. Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:51, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support I was not sure for a support, but I strongly disagree with Alchemist-hp. Please remember that this sepia tone was a choice of the photographers, and is not due to the age of the picture. A BW choice is not accurate.--Jebulon (talk) 17:04, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I have seen this claim several times that the sepia tone was an artistic choice. I don't think that is actually true. It may be a technical choice because the sepia tone helps protect pictures over time. I agree with Alchemist that his correction is better. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:18, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Yann: who said "artistic" choice ? I just said "choice". I notice that Marville, during the 2nd French Empire, for instance, used mostly B&W, "by choice". And his excellent pictures are still here.--Jebulon (talk) 17:48, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support as reflecting the intent of the photographer per Jebulon. Daniel Case (talk) 17:43, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry Adam but per Alchemist --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 19:03, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as per my comment above. I could support a sepia version with a proper contrast ajustment. Yann (talk) 21:00, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @Yann: That would either separate the image from the card, or darken the card unacceptably. This image is naturally fairly pale. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:41, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes this image is fairly pale, because it is an old and "bleached out" image. A digital restauration can correct this too! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 00:24, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose For this competition, we should have access to an original image. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:24, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @Archaeodontosaurus: I uploaded the original image before I uploaded this one. It's at File:Jules Massenet by Eugène Pirou - Original.jpg. Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:15, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - I also think that your version is too red. Sepia should be like this: File:Jules Massenet by Eugène Pirou, edit.jpg. Yann (talk) 22:07, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Yann: The contrast and sharpness are better, but I find it definitely too yellow.--Jebulon (talk) 00:48, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 14:10, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]