Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Ellis Island hospital

Ellis Island hospital window mural
Voting period ends on 20 May 2020  at 16:08:41 (UTC)
 * Reason:Window mural in Ellis Island Immigrant Hospital (defunct since 1951). A few years ago the artist JR took photos of patients from the archives and installed them as murals around the hospital grounds. This is one of those images. I found this one, on a broken window in a dark hallway, to be particularly effective. It's been in the hospital article for a while, and is the sole illustration of JR's work in the article about him (since he used public domain photos, it's an installation that we can host).
 * Articles in which this image appears:Ellis Island Immigrant Hospital, JR (artist)
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
 * Creator:Rhododendrites


 * Support as nominator – &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 16:08, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Support – his Unframed work is noted in the articles. Lots of broken glass in just 4 years actually that's how the glass was at the time . Well done. Bammesk (talk) 17:48, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. MER-C 18:10, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:29, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Support | DreamSparrow  Chat   16:08, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: I don't want to be a party pooper, but could we say a bit more about the copyright situation here? This is a work of art by a living artist. It uses PD photographs, but that doesn't mean that the resulting work is PD - in the same way that a photograph of a PD work of art isn't automatically PD (as you, Rhododendrites, recognise, as you claim copyright on the photograph). The US does not have freedom of panorama for 2d or 3d works. As far as I can see, this is a non-free image. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:22, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * My understanding is that a faithful reproduction of a public domain work doesn't create a new copyright, even if it's made much bigger and displayed on a different surface. As such, the license for this picture-of-a-picture that I put on the file (by default, FWIW), would be limited to the larger context/framing/postprocessing and indeed might not hold up as sufficiently original to create a new copyright. I'm not so concerned with that. If it's unclear, I'd recommend nominating it for deletion on Commons, but the Commons community does (in my experience anyway) tend to err on the side of keeping depictions of public domain works. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 20:46, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Is this a reproduction of only one public domain photo? If not, then I don't think there's any question that there have been artistic choices made sufficient to generate copyright (IANAL). Even if if it is a reproduction of only one photo, there are surely choices made about placement - this isn't just a mechanical reproduction of an old photo, it's placing an old photo on an unusual "canvas" in a particular and deliberate way. I think it's a stretch of the "a faithful reproduction of a public domain work" approach to call this PD. (I don't feel particularly motivated to go and argue my case at Commons right now.) Josh Milburn (talk) 06:29, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose; enough questions about copyright remain that I don't think we should be promoting this. Sorry. Josh Milburn (talk) 06:30, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

--Armbrust The Homunculus 17:59, 20 May 2020 (UTC)