Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/And all seems dark as night for it

"It is far better to face the bullets than to be killed at home by a bomb."
Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2014  at 02:48:36 (UTC)
 * Reason:A rather striking, albeit simple, recruitment poster from WWI. Such posters tended to be a little over the top. There are prettier ones, but this one is widely in use. Part of my work on Operation Great War Centennial.
 * Articles in which this image appears:In no particular order: Bombardment of Yarmouth and Lowestoft, Civil defense, German strategic bombing during World War I, God Save the Queen, History of the United Kingdom during World War I, Recruitment to the British Army during the First World War, Zeppelin
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/History/World War I
 * Creator:Publicity Department, Central Recruiting Depot. Restoration by Adam Cuerden.


 * Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:48, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Support - Nice clear-cut scan. Great restoration as well. Étienne Dolet (talk) 04:48, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Support - Solid restoration.--Godot13 (talk) 05:08, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Support - Fantastic. Though I think the Blitzed Brits would have been happier with blimps than bombers. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:06, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Support — Interesting bit of (attempted) wartime psychology. High historical EV. Sca (talk) 14:15, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Question There is a yellow taint in the upper part of the white frame. Is that intentional? -- Slaunger (talk) 22:26, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
 * If it's what I think you're looking at, it appeared to be ink, so I left it. I think they were using yellow ink to modify the blues/greens. Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:39, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, some of it is ink, yes, but there is also a tendency of a more yellow gradient cast in the upper parts of the image as if it was a bit bleached by light over the years or so. Nothing serious though, just an observation. -- Slaunger (talk) 09:17, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm having trouble seeing it, to be honest. Any comparison that'd make it easy to notice? Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:21, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
 * For me it is quite evident by just looking at the preview in the nom page. But nevermind, it is not a serious issue at all. -- Slaunger (talk) 09:34, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh, right. I think that's somewhat more of a lightness/darkness issue than a saturation issue. The LoC scans are done with a book scanner, I believe, which don't help matters. If it's not that visible, I think I might leave it, particularly given how much of the green border on the left and top had to be reconstructed (see TIFF/LoC link), which could throw attempts to do subtle tweaks off. Thoough there is one thing I could try... let me load this up. Adam Cuerden (talk) 10:28, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Think that worked. Used the hue-saturation tool with the select tools to get a bit of selectivity. How's it look now? Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:00, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
 * It is a subtle edit, but I do notice the improvement. Thanks for investing your time in it. -- Slaunger (talk) 11:52, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
 * No worries! I just had to figure out a good way to do it, given I didn't want the reconstructed green outer borders to change. (They're partially made by flipping borders from other sides, so are about the right colour already. Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:04, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Support Good restoration and high EV. -- Slaunger (talk) 09:17, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. -- Alexf(talk) 14:19, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Support : per Slaunger. --JLPC (talk) 08:28, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

--Armbrust The Homunculus 02:49, 29 September 2014 (UTC)