Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Deep Throat

Deep Throat
Voting period ends on 2 Feb 2012 at 23:55:37 (UTC)
 * Reason:High quality reproduction of (admittedly fairly simple) film poster for a very notable pornographic film. I prefer the one with a handjob, but one without hands is available too.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Deep Throat (film), Golden Age of Porn
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Entertainment
 * Creator:Employee(s) of Bryanston Pictures or a subsidary, restored by Quibik


 * Support as nominator --Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:55, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose --I think this is a nice image, but too light and washed out. And other than being tied to the most famous porn flick ever, there is nothing special about this image. – JBarta (talk) 07:12, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * To quote myself below "Our personal taste in the art style in something such as a movie poster or artwork should generally not be considered, but the quality of the reproduction. The reason being that the EV is derived from its representation of the subject of an article". This is the same reason that a quality reproduction of Campbell's Soup Cans (if it were freely licensed) could be a FP despite having a fairly simple subject matter. Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:03, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * It's not quite the same; this image isn't a famous piece of artwork, it's an image that was used to accompany a famous piece of "art" work. The noted work is the film, not the poster. J Milburn (talk) 08:18, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Crisco, by your reasoning, every quality reproduction of any two dimensional work that has encyclopedic value is deserving of featured picture status. Why is this image any more deserving than other similar images? Regarding the image quality, looking at other versions of this image both here and on the web, I believe I'm accurate in making my criticisms about the colors and lightness. If you disagree, please tell me why. – JBarta (talk) 10:04, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * @J Milburn: Gotcha. I was considering the one which is essentially lines and squares, but I couldn't remember it's title.
 * @Jbarta: Would I support a faithful copy of the cover of The White Album? Probably not... probably. Would go great for April fool's day though. For this, I think it's complicated enough to deserve input. As for the colouring comments, I will upload an alt when I can get to a web cafe. This laptop doesn't have the proper software and my one that does died while I was at RecentChangesCamp in Canberra. Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:30, 25 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Neutral I am not a fan. --Guerillero &#124; My Talk  22:32, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. Subject matter has perfectly suitable EV.  My monitor may not be configured correctly, but the black-and-white image at the top looks kind of jpeggy.  Spikebrennan (talk) 15:47, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
 * If you look at the original scan/photo you'll see the photo of the woman is blown up halftone. The image quality of the poster itself is is somewhat low (at least by modern standards) and the scan just picked that up. The image was subsequently edited to minimize the halftone effect (among other things). The current image is an improvement, but still suffers from being a mediocre quality poster. Actually, a case could be made that because of the smoothing of the halftone, the current image is not a faithful reproduction of the original poster. – JBarta (talk) 18:32, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 01:12, 3 February 2012 (UTC)