Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Aurelia Henry Reinhardt, (Pres't Mills College) LCCN2014716751 (croppped, retouched).png

Aurelia Henry Reinhardt
Voting period ends on 5 Dec 2018  at 21:56:51 (UTC)
 * Reason:I've been working on retouching this on and off for the past few months. Couple things to point out. First, her hair is a little stringy, so if you zoom in close, I've fixed some things that were obvious scratches or dust marks, but I've left a lot of it because it's hard to tell that it isn't actually her hair. Same thing with the dress. Pretty sure it's velvet or something and that a good portion of the noise there was actually there, because I'm not sure lint brushes were a thing in ~1910.Other than that, this is a pretty rare find. She went on to become one of the foremost women academics of the early 20th century, but this was basically a period posed glamour shot of her before she really meant anything to anybody. The book really gives it away, since of course that's what she would choose for her prop. It was most likely 1909-1914, because she still has her wedding band on, and her husband died in 1914, although she really didn't rise to fame until after his death. All in all, really a high quality scan of a remarkably preserved image, of a remarkable person, from before anyone knew how remarkable she was.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Aurelia Henry Reinhardt
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/People/Others
 * Creator:George Grantham Bain Collection, retouched by GreenMeansGo


 * Support as nominator –  G M G  talk  21:56, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment – Very nice restoration. Areas close to the mid-left border and lower-right border can use some more cleanup. I would support if that's done. Bammesk (talk) 01:35, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * There's some weird hair-like patterns on her dress which ideally would be removed - they cross wrinkles and other hings in ways that indicate them to be on the print. I've noticed darker areas seem prone to be "sticky" in past restorations, collecting a lot more dust and fluff. I could potentially accept that given the high resolution. More problematic is the left hand side of the book, which looks very odd to me, like it's been blurred. It was not like that in the original. Reluctant weak oppose Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:23, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Agree with the book blur :-) (ghost from the past!!) Bammesk (talk) 02:56, 27 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Hmm... probably withdraw this for now and spend some time working on the feedback.  G M G  talk  20:08, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

--Armbrust The Homunculus 22:04, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Withdrawn nomination. Armbrust The Homunculus 22:04, 27 November 2018 (UTC)