Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Lauren Anderson

Lauren Anderson

 * Reason:Another example of a professional quality free photograph provided by the subject through our photo submission system. Though I do not consider this as good as my other recent nomination, I still feel it is technically of a high quality, and extremely valuable as it illustrates an article about someone who has made a career out of their looks/being photographed. On such articles, the need for illustration is even higher than in most other biographies.
 * Articles this image appears in:Lauren Anderson
 * Creator:Work for hire owned and released by Lauren Anderson


 * Support as nominator --J Milburn (talk) 17:47, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Great image, however I would suggest a crop to get rid of the distracting knee (which appears to be giving off some odd light). My only concern other than that are possible slightly blown whites in her hair. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Staxringold (talk • contribs) 18:00, 3 September 2009
 * I actually considered cropping out the knee myself just after I'd made the nomination. I'd imagine the blown whites are a deliberate feature- compare to our other featured model pic where there is some crazy lighting in the hair. As this is a modelling shot, I'd imagine the "rules" of what makes a good picture are a little different. J Milburn (talk) 18:05, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Seriously though, with the knee, am I crazy or is there something weird in the version that includes it? Staxringold talkcontribs 18:08, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The line of her bra is following the line of her knee so it looks like a ghost/reflection? Mfield (Oi!) 18:20, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

--jjron (talk) 08:16, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Very weak oppose both Whilst applauding the releasing of such images for free use, and not doubting the image's value for illustrating the subject, I too find the framing on the original to be a little awkward, the brain want's to see more leg or no knee at all and as such it is distracting. Unfortunately the crop does really cure it, whilst it's better with the knee removed, the rest of the image then feels unbalanced to the point that the original remains a better complete image. Mfield (Oi!) 18:20, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose Sorry, but Mfield sums it up nicely above. That is some weird reflection going on, the curvature matches that of the knee below it and not the outline of the bra on the other side. Sasata (talk) 19:18, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment per Mfield, the crop still isn't right. An even tighter crop might help but I'm not convinced it wasn't too tight top & right to start with. And I know it sounds daft but that gap in the wood behind her head might be contributing a lot to the lack of balance in the composition. LIghting is good, FWIW, very typical with good EV for glamour photography. --mikaultalk 20:44, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I've added it to that article. J Milburn (talk) 20:52, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Support Alt 1 - I like it, good Ev for the new article its been added to. Shows a different sort of image to the one already featured. Good portrait, good composition (apart from hair chopped off) and i don't agree with regards to the crop unbalancing the image, its just a head a shoulders portrait shot now --  Chil dzy  ¤  Ta lk  00:43, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Support Alt 1. One more nice free shot of a celebrity and EV. Brand[t] 15:00, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Mfield --Muhammad (talk) 15:55, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose regretfully, although I think it is among the best images of a living person on Wikipedia the framing of the image is just not up to featured picture standards. Guest9999 (talk) 03:32, 6 September 2009 (UTC)