Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Irises screen

Irises screen (kakitsubata-zu) (two panels)
Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2017  at 23:50:16 (UTC)


 * Reason:My third and likely last nomination of an iconic image of Japanese art, for the time being at least. Irises (紙本金地著色燕子花図) is a pair of six-panel folding screens (byōbu) by the Japanese artist Ogata Kōrin of the Rinpa school, from 1702, and now held by the Nezu Museum in Tokyo.  They are shown in the reverse of the current (2004) 5000 yen note.  While the originals remained in Japan, it is believed that a woodcut reproduction may influenced the Impressionist works of Vincent van Gogh, including his Irises.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Both panels are used in Irises screen, but there are versions in other articles, from Ogata Kōrin and Byōbu to List of National Treasures of Japan (paintings) and Genroku bunka. Some of these should probably be replaced.
 * FP category for this image:Artwork/East Asian art
 * Creator:Uploaded by commons:User:Bigjap from the Nezu Museum


 * Support as nominator – Theramin (talk) 23:50, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Below the minimum resolution. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:39, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose - per Crisco, well below min resolution. Mattximus (talk) 02:27, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I am relatively new at this, so may I ask, what "minimum resolution" is being applied here? The first two panels are 2,000×835 and 2,009×830, and the third one is 3,904×1,636 pixels.  I see WP:FP? indicates a minimum of 1,500 pixels in width and height, subject to exceptions.  The third one, at least, meets the minimum, surely?  And given these works are held in the private collection at the Nezu Museum, how would you propose that we secure a higher resolution image?  Do we have to wait for the museum to release one with an appropriate licence? Theramin (talk) 21:44, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
 * We would either have to have someone at Nezu take images, or wait for the Museum to release a higher resolution digitization. Exceptions to the minimum resolution are only rarely granted; indeed, images such as painting digitizations are often held to a higher standard. I think there's only a couple exceptions made a year.
 * I wouldn't get behind the ALT as it is clearly oversaturated. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 05:42, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
 * The original alternate was CMYK, which doesn't handle well in a browser. I replaced it with a RGB conversion (no other changes), and sure enough, the saturation dropped... (Remember to purge the page cache!) --Janke | Talk 07:28, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks Janke. That looks much better.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:16, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Fine, so I guess that means the two original images are hopeless? I'll let you all decide between yourselves whether the third one qualifies or not. Theramin (talk) 23:00, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Would need the other panel in hi-res in order to qualify, not complete with just one... --Janke | Talk 06:18, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

--Armbrust The Homunculus 00:02, 14 July 2017 (UTC)