Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Battle at La Hogue

The Battle at La Hogue (1781)
Voting period ends on 26 Aug 2010 at 15:51:54 (UTC)


 * Reason:A fine, high-quality copy of a large steel engraving. Somewhat screwed over by Wikipedia's thumbnailing system, mind ye. This is evidently due to recent changes, and will hopefully be fixed soon, as it's likely to be a problem with ALL engravings. Bug 24857 fixed.
 * Articles in which this image appears:William Woollett, Action at La Hogue (1692)
 * FP category for this image:Featured_pictures/History/War
 * Creator:William Woollett and Benjamin West

Support - Magnificent details, on par with the Jane Austen engraving. Welcome back :) P. S. Burton  (talk)  23:54, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Support as nominator --Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:51, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello again. -- I'ḏ ♥  One  18:16, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * This place is annoyingly hard to stay away from. A bad thing, as it's probably not good for me to deal with half the stuff I do here. Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:43, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Eh, 'salright. Meanwhile this is another very well-restored engraving. -- I'ḏ ♥  One  03:25, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Support I think the technical solution for the proposed thumbnail/fullsize duality already exists. Papa Lima Whiskey  (talk) 12:50, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: Could you clarify what the difference between the first and the second image is? Is the second image an alt? Sorry if I'm being a little moronic here. J Milburn (talk) 22:57, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Basically, pretty much because the full-size image is so very large, and because the thumbnailer isn't really optimised to deal with copperplate engravings, the full-sized image doesn't look that great as a thumbnail. However, changes to make it look good as a tiny thumbnail would destroy the appearance and value of the full size image. Hence, I created a workaround: The second image is a modified, smaller version of the big one, shrunk down, contrast upped, sharpened, and so on. This does a better job at bringing out some of the details of this very large image at the very small size it's used in articles.
 * I thought that we could tag the small one with FPlowres, with the full-sized image being the actual FP. This seems like a better option than ruining the full-size image to make it look good at article size. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:00, 19 August 2010 (UTC) Bug 24857 fixed Adam Cuerden (talk) 10:13, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * That sounds dangerously like an overuse of FPlowres to me- it should be very much the exception, rather than the norm, in my eyes. J Milburn (talk) 11:06, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, no longer necessary - they fixed the thumbnailer. Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:31, 21 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Support the thumbnailer one, excellent! --Extra  9 9 9  (Contact me  +  contribs) 11:21, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Support now this thumbnail stuff has been sorted. EV very solid in both usages, so I don't mind whether this goes into art or history. J Milburn (talk) 12:12, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

— Mae din\ talk 16:34, 26 August 2010 (UTC)