Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Benjamin Franklin Tilley

Benjamin Franklin Tilley
Voting period ends on 16 Mar 2022  at 13:48:19 (UTC)
 * Reason:I place this at 1896-1901 by the rank insignia, so this seems a decent photo for its time, although it does fall into the period where lighting effects - extreme shadows and such - became popular. This is also the period where you're starting to exchange resolution for the speed, but that's not entirely a bad thing as it does have character and expression to it that a slow photo might not have. Editing history of the article (twice in all of 2021) shows little need to worry about waiting very long for it to settle in.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Benjamin Franklin Tilley, American Samoa +1
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/People/Military
 * Creator:Unknown photographer, restored by Adam Cuerden


 * Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.6% of all FPs 13:48, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment A little lightening on the left would improve it... --Janke | Talk 17:41, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * That feels inaccurate to the original image, especially as it's not something fixable with a basic exposure correction without causing changes in his uniform. The chiaroscuro effect is definitely something photographers were very much trying for in this era, and the clarity of the eye in the shadowed portion shows a very effective usage of it, even if it's out of fashion now. There are two known pictures of him. This is definitely the better one.  Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.6% of all FPs 19:05, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Or, more succinctly, "It's a style that was popular at the time, and, because it's as dark as parts of his uniform, there's no simple, non-destructive way to change the decision of the photographer." Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.6% of all FPs 20:33, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I would assume that the contrast has increased during all the scanning & editing stages. Old photos from this period seldom had jet-black areas - compare with the "postcards" seen here recently... --Janke | Talk 22:08, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * You'd be surprised. But given the relative unpopularity of the technique nowadays, we tend not to see examples of it nowadays. It was pretty popular from about 1890 to the early 1920s. P.G. Wodehouse even has a lengthy comedic rant about how great modern photography is for dealing with ugly bastards like himself by hiding them in darkness. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.6% of all FPs 04:34, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
 * But I suppose that we're both making valid points here. You think the face being better lit on the left would make a better photo. And, certainly it would by any modern standard. But given that dark navy-blue uniform is basically as dark as his face except where the wrinkles catch the bright lights, it's kind of hard to change the past, and I think that the dark shadow was the photographer's intent (and I'm also a bit worried because photographic grain can look odd if you don't handle adjustments pretty subtly). On the upside, I'd say as these things go, the detail in the dark portion is impressive. I've seen worse-photographed eyes in light. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.6% of all FPs 20:04, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Support – I support either way. (you can see the unedited scan here) Bammesk (talk) 22:50, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Support – DreamSparrow  Chat   14:34, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Support TheFreeWorld (talk) 16:32, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:26, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Support. MER-C 20:04, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Support.-- Vulp  ❯❯❯  here!  17:55, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

--Armbrust The Homunculus 17:46, 16 March 2022 (UTC)