Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Koryak dancer portrait.jpg

File:Koryak dancer portrait.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Aug 2023 at 19:45:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info Another amazing picture from WLF. I especially like the energy this protrait radiates. Created and uploaded by Anton Gutmann - nominated by Kritzolina -- Kritzolina (talk) 19:45, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kritzolina (talk) 19:45, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 21:00, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support As Kritzolina wrote. --Stepro (talk) 05:34, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Peulle (talk) 08:44, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Info I have corrected obvious typo --LexKurochkin (talk) 12:42, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Yes, it is amazing. --LexKurochkin (talk) 12:43, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Powerful indeed, but I don't think the desaturated look (-62 Vibrance in the EXIF metadata) works well for portraits, as it results in greyish skin tones that mischaracterise the Koryaks (or any healthy human being, for that matter). --Julesvernex2 (talk) 13:16, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of the photo editing techniques that have popped up in recent years. It is meant to make the photo look old and sun-bleached, like it was taken with analogue film sometime in the previous century. This style is mainly embraced by younger photographers who weren't around before digital cameras. Analogue film photography, is seen as "cool" these days, and there are many "schools" as to which old-photo-look to use. The latest fad is to make photos look like the Oppenheimer film which emulates old films. I guess that the photographer who made this photo, thought the subject was suited for this kind of "faded beauty editing". --Cart (talk) 15:55, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's a fair point, and I can see how this subject lends itself to a vintage look. I would however argue that the issue with this image is not one of style, but rather of execution, since not enough care was taken to preserve skin tones. By contrast, the colours on this image also seem to have been tweaked, but the skin tones still look natural.

PS: the Oppenheimer look is indeed very striking, I wonder how much of it is due to the film stock used, and how much is colour grading? For Dune, I seem to recall that a convoluted process was needed to achieve the director's vision (shot on digital, transferred to 35mm film, and then scanned back to digital). --Julesvernex2 (talk) 17:20, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, unfortunately, very few of those using this style are experienced editors, and they lack having lived with the visual references. Btw, I can also recommend the art that Simon Stålenhag makes, where he uses old Swedish 70s photos as color scheme for his art. :-) --Cart (talk) 18:19, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 08:38, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as per Jules above. Yann (talk) 10:06, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Maybe this is a dumb reason to oppose, but I keep seeing the two pimples on his face, and they distract me inordinately. I think this is probably a legitimate reaction because the photo is supposed to be about him dancing, not the photo of someone with some acne on his face. Sorry if this seems shallow. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:22, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just saying, don't get too hung up on the "dancer" part of the photo. It does say "Koryak dancer portrait"; it's just a description of him instead of his name. If there was a portrait of you here, and it said "Portrait of flutist Ikan Kekek", it could still be just a normal photo of you, you don't have to play in it for the caption to be accurate. (Not even gonna try comment on you vs the pimple situation — I'm watching a re-run of Ugly Betty and my mind is far too PC now. ;-) ) --Cart (talk) 21:32, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Part of the joke of that show to me was that "Ugly Betty" was not ugly. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:08, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support From my perspective, the face is not in the middle of the image. But it's still a very wild pic. - ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇷🇺} (talk) 08:56, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I do agree with Jules Poco a poco (talk) 04:13, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Jules.--Ermell (talk) 09:40, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Normally I prefer “real” colours, but I have to admit that the special look works for me in this case. --Aristeas (talk) 14:09, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting and powerful picture --imehling (talk) 05:51, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 09:02, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Jules. -- Karelj (talk) 10:19, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Jules. Daniel Case (talk) 20:02, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Jules. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 16:55, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 8 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:35, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]