Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Imeprial Crown of Russia

Imperial Crown of Russia
Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2010 at 23:10:48 (UTC)
 * Reason:Very nice details. I like how it shows all the diamonds with details
 * Articles in which this image appears:Imperial Crown of Russia, Coronation of the Russian monarch
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Diagrams, drawings, and maps/Drawings
 * Creator:Original-Hugo Gerard Ströhl, Vector Version by Avalokitesvara


 * Support as nominator --Spongie555 (talk) 23:10, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose. I don't get it- what's it adding to the article? Why not a photograph? I'm assuming this is a vectorised version of a drawing- while impressive, I don't quite get why it was vectorised, and I don't love the bold black lines. They make it look more like a jigsaw puzzle. J Milburn (talk) 23:32, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose It's missing 'A CG drawing of...' I don't see any EV for it really. I understand it probably took some time, but I don't see any value, and an actual photograph would be much more valuable. JFitch   (talk)  23:34, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment The black lines i think are supposed to be the shade the crown is giving off. Also it shows the crown what it would look like at its peack when it was all new. The real crown has gotten pretty old by looks at some pictures of it. Also it does look like a jigsaw puzzle but i think its supposed to show where all the jewals are at so they dont overlap. Thats what i think. Spongie555 (talk) 00:05, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose An Adobe Illustrator-like drawing of a thing of what is no-doubt great beauty looks like a let down. Although it is arguably better than the awful pictures currently in the article, and while I can see this was a great labor of love, I find it to be far short of being “eye-catching”. Greg L (talk) 02:44, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment It is better then the other pictures in its article. To me its a picture you have to stop and look at the details. Spongie555 (talk) 03:25, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That doesn't mean that it's an example of the finest work that Wikipedia can produce, and therefore doesn't mean we should award an FP just because no-one's got a photograph... It's not like it's a historical event that can no longer be photographed... Oppose sorry... gaz hiley .co.uk  10:05, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment great artwork. -- I'ḏ ♥  One  21:46, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose I'm disappointed that a photograph isn't available. I'm not convinced that such a drawing is better representative of the crown than any ordinary photo. -- mcshadypl T C  23:54, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose - to provide more context, this appears to be a vectorized version of File:File:Ströhl-Regentenkronen-Fig. 03.png, which is itself a historical drawing from the 19th century. So there is some historical interest in this image, but only in a very indirect way.  Altogether it seems like a well-meaning but misguided attempt at clarity. Tim Pierce (talk) 02:55, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 21:23, 18 September 2010 (UTC)