Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Mar 2011 at 02:12:40 (UTC)
- Reason
- high resolution, restoration, unique historic item, encyclopaedic value
- Articles in which this image appears
- Donald Pleasence
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment
- Creator
- Allan warren
- Support as nominator -- Peter Weis ( talk) 02:12, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
- Comment: Much improved, but why such a tight top crop? -- Avenue ( talk) 03:53, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
- it's the framing of the original image - the space above in the original version is of pure black, which indicates this is part of the medium used for digitisation (kodachrome slide or else). regards, Peter Weis ( talk) 07:09, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
- Supporttttttt. Love it. J Milburn ( talk) 00:17, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
- Conditional Support. Love the photo, but the new crop is too tight. Kaldari ( talk) 00:39, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
- Support: The original should have been promoted imo (see Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Donald Pleasence). I can see some of the fixes in the edit, nothing most people would notice without a microscope. The tightness of the crop was noted in the previous discussion and making it tighter has made it worse. Honestly though, I think people are getting too wrapped up in the technical details. Most of the actor photos we get are random snaps at a convention or award ceremony, while this is a professionally done portrait with very high EV since it conveys something of the type of roles he was known for. I would hope that we'd be trying to encourage more contributions like this rather than worrying about cropping and whether there was a barely visible bit of lint on the negative.-- RDBury ( talk) 09:45, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
- Support. I'm not a big fan of the crop, but this is an excellent portrait anyway. The restoration has fixed up a lot more than "a barely visible bit of lint". The flaws were pretty glaring at full size. I'm glad the original was not promoted, as I don't believe we should promote images with significant defects than we can reasonably fix. I'd hope that maintaining high technical standards will encourage useful contributions like Peter's restoration of this image. -- Avenue ( talk) 10:14, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
- Support Per RDBury and nom. Cowtowner ( talk) 18:17, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose Too tight crop on top. -- JovianEye ( talk) 21:16, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
- Support, crop notwithstanding - this is a fine, fine portrait. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa? Lo dicono a Signa. 15:11, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
- Support; this is a very well-done portrait; as RDB says, the technical issues are not that big a deal. If Peter is right that this is the crop of the actual negative, than OK. Chick Bowen 21:18, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Promoted File:Donald Pleasence Allan Warren edit.jpg -- Makeemlighter ( talk) 07:17, 13 March 2011 (UTC)