Commons:Valued image candidates/Meister der tiburtinischen Sibylle 001.jpg

Meister der tiburtinischen Sibylle 001.jpg

**declined**
Image
Nominated by	Myrabella (talk) on 2010-03-31 15:24 (UTC)
Scope	Nominated as the most valued image on Commons within the scope: Tiburtine Sibyl
Used in	Global usage
Reason	The mythic meeting of Caesar Augustus with the Tiburtine Sibyl later reinterpreted as a Christian theme became a favored motif of artists. This 15th-century painting by the Early Netherlandish painter known under the name "Master of Tiburtine Sibyl" is the most evocative to me, among the images available within this scope. See also: [1]. --Myrabella (talk). The image looks good on-screen at the review size, which is a VI quality requirement. 15:24, 31 March 2010 (UTC) -- Myrabella (talk)[reply]
Review (criteria)	~~Support~~ Die flächige mittelalterliche Malweise ist ideal für kleine Ansichten. (In the translators' forum they haven't found an English word for flächig yet.) Well documented. --Ikar.us (talk) 21:16, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply] Withdrawn for even better candidate. --Ikar.us (talk) 20:28, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply] Oppose I just don't think the reproduction is good enough. It's so... yellow. The other image is supposed to be yellow. This one? It's a Yorck project reproduction, and they're almost always wrongly-coloured. Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:44, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply] Comment The scopes isn't about the painting, but the subject that the painting depicts. IMO technical quality of the reproduction doesn't matter, if it doen't disturb recognizability of the subject.--Ikar.us (talk) 15:49, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply] I'm sorry, I just don't agree. When the reproduction is this bad, with a strong yellow cast that makes the contrast between the figures be substantially reduced, it's just too misleading. It's being suggested as valued because of who its by - the Master of the Tiburtinian Sibyl. But it misrepresents his work. What if we cropped File:Nuremberg chronicles - Tiburnine Sibyll (XCIIIv).jpg down to the image, and did a little basic perspective correction? It's not great art, but it's notable and, if anything, much clearer at thumbnail size. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:20, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply] @Adam: If you produced the edited version you have suggested, it could be a third competitor indeed. --Myrabella (talk) 17:44, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply] I've not actually used GIMP for perspective correction before - most of my edits are to engravings I prepared myself. I'll see what happens. Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:40, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply] Can't seem to fix the barrel distortion, alas. Someone else want to have a poke? Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:09, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply] Here is an attempt: File:Nuremberg chronicles - Tiburnine Sibyll (XCIIIv) edit.jpg --Myrabella (talk) 11:44, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply] Scores: 1. Antonio da Trento - The Tiburtine sibyl and the Emperor Augustus-2010: 0 2. Meister der tiburtinischen Sibylle 001.jpg: -1 <-- 3. Nuremberg chronicles - Tiburnine Sibyll (XCIIIv) edit.jpg: +3 => File:Antonio da Trento - The Tiburtine sibyl and the Emperor Augustus.jpg: Declined. File:Meister der tiburtinischen Sibylle 001.jpg: Declined. <-- File:Nuremberg chronicles - Tiburnine Sibyll (XCIIIv) edit.jpg: Promoted. --Ikar.us (talk) 16:48, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]