Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Écorché by Honoré Fragonard

Écorché by Honoré Fragonard
Voting period ends on 1 Feb 2011 at 16:10:11 (UTC)
 * Reason:Because it's creepy and different, :) Will soon be featured on Commons: nom.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Honoré Fragonard, Musée Fragonard d'Alfort
 * FP category for this image:Sciences
 * Creator:Jebulon


 * Support as nominator -- Mae din\ talk 16:10, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Support I find this to be eye-catching and unusual (for FPC). However, I can’t see any use for all that surrounding black; it could be cropped tighter. Notwithstanding that quibble, support based on the subject matter and the lighting and overall quality. Greg L (talk) 20:03, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose As far as I can tell, the rest of the horse has been preserved too. I think the whole horse should be there for this to be of FP quality. Cowtowner (talk) 21:34, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Getting the whole of the horse would have prevented this from being FP quality. As a museum piece behind glass photographed hand-held, fitting a horse in frame (think of the size) would have been almost impossible to do well and without introducing distracting elements (glass corners, reflections, museum plaques, bases, supports, etc) or quality issues (blur and noise, namely).  Considering the circumstances, it has to be this way, as the creator stated: "This picture is indeed a 'detail'. It is a museum picture, and it is impossible to take a good enough one of the whole composition, because of the lack of distance, the glass reflections, or the back light, or the contre-jour... It was for me the only way to show this 'cavalier', sorry."   Mae din\ talk 22:52, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Very well, as it appears now it looks like it is in the open air (kudos to the photographer) and I was unaware of it being behind glass. I've struck my oppose but I'm not quite ready to support. Cowtowner (talk) 23:06, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Support. Good EV and quality, unusual subject. --Avenue (talk) 14:05, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Support - I suspect it's as good as we'll get for the subject, and the subject is eye-catching enough to stop a fellow in his tracks. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 16:05, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Terrible composition. Way too much headroom and totally random aspect ratio. I know aesthetics aren't that important here, but for a modern reproducible photo it should at least utilize some basic concepts of good photographic composition. Kaldari (talk) 22:22, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Kaldari and: I think the background don't fit to the picture; it is way too unrealistic. I would have desired another background, like in a museum or "repairshop" or mortuary.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 19:11, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak support; I like it, and I think the EV is solid, and I think it's eyecatching. The technical quality is just a tad lacking for me. J Milburn (talk) 00:31, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Support -- George Chernilevsky  talk 11:51, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Added crop.  Mae din\ talk 18:43, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Support cropped --7040US (talk) 17:32, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

More comments on the crop needed, please.  Jujutacular  talk 17:31, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Support both, prefer crop. --Avenue (talk) 03:19, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Support crop, but what are the chances to crop out the two white bars? (the one in the back should be easy). Nergaal (talk) 19:19, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

-- Jujutacular  talk 09:44, 8 February 2011 (UTC)