Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Cynthia Woodhead

Cynthia "Sippy" Woodhead
Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2016  at 05:30:22 (UTC)
 * Reason:While grainy, this is a fantastic candid shot. Check out the water drops in her hair, and the emotion of her expression.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Cynthia Woodhead
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/People/Sport
 * Creator: Koen Suyk / Anefo; Restored by Adam Cuerden


 * Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk) 05:30, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Support - Considering the speed of film needed for athletic meets, I don't mind the grain here. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 05:51, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment – Right side of her head (left side of pic) is rather badly shadowed.
 * Understand re fast film & athletics, but this print is awfully grainy. Looks like it was taken on ASA 1000 film – too bad photog didn't switch to Tri-X for this shot. Sca (talk) 14:38, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
 * If you'll look at the original, you'll see I've brought up the shadows a bit. You'll note her hair is at least somewhat distinct from the background here; that isn't true of the original. I'm not sure how much more I can do about the dark part of the photo. I think it's definitely an improvement, though. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:40, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I guess I could go a little further. Updating... Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:04, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Done, and Chris has been notified the nomination has changed. Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:17, 20 July 2016 (UTC)


 *  Weak support – This does look better – and it's a nice capture of a moment. Sca (talk) 18:12, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment Her hair got mixed up with the black background. Rainbow Archer (talk) 16:59, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I know. A good portion of my work on this was bringing it away from the background as much as possible without being misleading. I think I've done as much as I could in that line. If you didn't know, I always upload the originals. This is the pre-restoration image. I think you'll agree I've pulled out a lot of shadow detail. Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:00, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Support Not perfect technically, but the excellent composition and strong EV of the moment the photo captures more than makes up for this. Nick-D (talk) 00:24, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Support In my opinion, It's good enough.MITB --- MITB_talk 09:34, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Struck as user isn't eligible to !vote. (was registered only 2 days ago instead of the required 25) Armbrust The Homunculus 11:12, 24 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Support - Good EV, nice candid shot (and we don't get too many photographs from this era). Kaldari (talk) 03:30, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Support – Jobas (talk) 10:14, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

--Armbrust The Homunculus 05:34, 30 July 2016 (UTC)