Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Hupa fisherman

Hupa fisherman
This photo is titled "A smoky day at the Sugar Bowl", and was taken by Edward S. Curtis, one of the masters of photography. It depicts a Hupa man with spear, standing on a rock midstream; in background, fog partially obscures trees on the mountainsides. It looks like a painting come to life. - brian0918  &#153;  05:20, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Nominate and support. - brian0918  &#153;  05:20, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Jonas Olson 10:50, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Could you provide a reason for opposing? Mgm|(talk) 10:52, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * I think at this point most of us aren't really taking his votes seriously. -- brian0918  &#153;  14:08, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Well you can speak for yourself, I don't see any reason why his votes shouldn't be respected, and either way, they still count. ed g2s  &bull;  talk  16:27, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * So you do still frequent this page, eh? -- brian0918 &#153;  16:31, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, our instruction do still suggest that an oppose should be followed by a reason, but perhaps this is one for the talk page. -- Solipsist 20:35, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I never thought of that, actually. I guess we all sometimes state our support or opposition without reasons. Should there really be a need for reasons all the time? You know, it's a matter of personal opinions, isn't it? As for this picture, I like it, I really do. It has a calm mood that I approve of, and the layered background in different shades of gray is nice. Yet, it simply didn't catch my eye as some other pictures do. By the way, feel free to take my votes seriously at any time! That's what I put them here for. Jonas Olson 22:04, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Taking your vote seriously is, at times, an exercise in patience because (through my eyes, anyway) you never seem to support any of the pictures placed here. Its gotten to the point where "Jonas Olson" and "oppose" are synonomous with one another. I grant you a point for not necicarily giving a reason for supporting a picture, but a reason &mdash; even a lousy one &mdash; for not supporting a picture would be apreciated, just so the nominator of the picture can get get a feel for the problem. TomStar81 04:49, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Beautifully put --Fir0002 08:21, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Ok, let's sort this out. My conception of WP:FP have been that it is a place where you end up only if you are a brilliant picture. Very few will therefore make it there, and there are a lot of pictures that are good, illustrative or interesting that won't. The default mode of any picture would therefore be not FP. With this approach, it feels natural to suggest that motivations should accompany support of a candidate, rather than opposition. Still, I would say, it is to a great deal a matter of opinions, which in many cases makes it hard to formulate reasons for either standpoint. And what to say if someone suddenly nominates just anything? Well, perhaps WP:FP really isn't compatible to these ideas of mine, and perhaps that's something I should already have realized. In that case I will not bother you anymore. Jonas Olson 09:03, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
 * By the way, having looked at this picture for a longer time now, I have actually changed my mind. Support. Jonas Olson 16:04, 4 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Support. Has stunning atmosphere. Mgm|(talk) 10:52, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Support --Soria 11:29, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Support - brilliant photograph. - Pioneer-12 23:08, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Support -- Longhair | Talk 03:40, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Support I really like the way the layers of different shades of grey show distance. --Fir0002 08:21, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. I was going to oppose and suggest one of Curtis' close-up portraits, such as Geronimo. This one looks a little odd in the thumbnail (possibly the vignetting), but the layering and detail is very nice in the full view. -- Solipsist 08:22, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Support - The detailed version is really something special. Unfortunately the reduced size version most people is quite plain though. - Ian 08:30, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutral. The image is worthy, but it only illustrates a substub.  Oddly enough, we don't seem to have an article on spear fishing, or I'd put it there. &mdash;Korath (Talk) 22:42, May 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * Good point. Meanwhile Native American is quite a lengthy article with hardly any illustrations. Is this because it is politically sensitive? Also, whilst Edward Curtis is well illustrated, it doesn't really show the much of photographs he is famous for. You could also consider the stub Salvage ethnography which I briefly considered for VfD the other day. Though a quick search showed not only was it a real term, but Curtis was considered a classic practioner of it. -- Solipsist 23:06, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
 * As luck would have it, Salvage ethnography is growing up quickly, so it is now illustrated with this photograph. -- Solipsist 20:14, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
 * +9 / -0 / 1 neutral -- Solipsist 22:48, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

