Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Family portrait

Family portrait
Voting period ends on 10 Feb 2015  at 15:26:32 (UTC)
 * Reason:A high EV quality image of our family.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Family Portrait (Voyager), Voyager 1
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Space/Looking back
 * Creator:NASA/JPL
 * Support as nominator – - The Herald (here I am) 15:26, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Support - fascinating with very high EV. --The one that forgot (talk) 21:19, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Support - Very nice.-Jobas (talk) 19:22, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Regretful oppose I remember seeing this with more than just uniform grey squares from Saturn to Neptune, there were faint dots showing the planets in question - has something been lost in treatment or compression of the file(s)? --Janke | Talk 22:02, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Never. Its the pure image. It will be great where you have seen it? - The Herald (here I am) 08:23, 1 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Oppose It's a bit hard to see how the grey squares add anything, when no detail can be made out in them. Needs more resolution, and more descriptive detail. Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:03, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Its a once-in-a-lifetime picture. Plus those square boxes are the only thing which you can see with those high sensitive camera from a distance of 6 billion kilometers (from Earth). The picture itself is a mosaic of 60 individual frames taken on February 14 (valentine's day), 1990. Can you expect more from such a picture Adam? Well, I can't. - The Herald (here I am) 16:30, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I think at full res, it would be well-worth an FP, but, as it is, letters are filling in for the actual spots. Compare File:MESSENGER Solar System Family Portrait.jpg - I realize it's not the same, but I think you'll agree that the connection between the samples and the insets is made much, much clearer with how it's done there. This one is just too shrunk down, and the colours change completely between grey boxes and full-colour insets. Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:44, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
 * But you should expect the shrinkge when its photographed from a distance twice as MESSENGER had it. - The Herald (here I am) 17:08, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The grey squares ARE images, in the end. They have data - if they didn't have data, this image would be absolutely meaningless. Given the originals of those images - which are surely more than the tens of pixels to a side we see here - we could surely have a much nicer version than we have here; those images of the planets were taken as part of this. My honest impression is that they've covered over the actual dots with the letters, which is hard to defend. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:35, 2 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Oppose per Adam. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:34, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

--Armbrust The Homunculus 15:27, 10 February 2015 (UTC)