Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Majas

Majas
Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2012 at 10:53:43 (UTC)
 * Reason:I was looking for a break from film posters (my morning was all posters) and I discovered these little gems. The two have an interesting back story: after outcry over his nude (La maja desnuda), the painter Francisco Goya went ahead and painted another one with clothes entitled La maja vestida, rather than overpainting his earlier work. La maja desnuda is said to have the first clear depiction of female pubic hair in Western art.
 * Articles in which this image appears:La maja desnuda, La maja vestida, Francisco Goya, and more
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
 * Creator:Francisco Goya


 * Support as nominator --Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:53, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment There's a kind of stamp on the right cheek of Maja desnuda. Brand meister  t   13:52, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * That same stamp appears a couple of times in the upper left of the second painting as well. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:09, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

*Oppose until the stamps are removed. Clegs (talk) 11:36, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. Yes, it says MUSEO NACIONAL DEL PRADO, I believe. The stamp isn't on the image on the website of the museum, where the description page indicates this image came from. This image is also brighter than the image on the website - are you sure the source is stated correctly?  God Emperor Talk  14:06, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It appears the uploader neglected to mark his source when uploading. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:33, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how that follows. Papa Lima Whiskey 2 (talk) 12:46, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I.e. I could  not find exact replicas online, so his/her source may be down. Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:37, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * But the image was uploaded in 2010. Since it's held at the MNdP, the source link points there, the watermark points there, don't you think it's likely that it came from there? They may have simply changed their watermarking policy in the 16 months or so since it was uploaded. Papa Lima Whiskey 2 (talk) 09:41, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Perhaps. Do you have a link to a script that allows one to download such images? Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:51, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Scratch that. Apparently doing the same thing over again can bring a different result. Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:50, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll work on it tomorrow my time (UTC+7) Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:37, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Removed. Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:41, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Support now. Brand meister  t   16:55, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. There are still (at my count) 5 stamps in the desnuda and 4 in the vestida. Also, if I'm nitpicky, you can see a bit of white left over from the stamp on the cheek of the desnuda on the line between face and hair, though I wouldn't notice anything wrong if I wasn't looking for it.  God Emperor Talk  22:54, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Make that 7 on the desnuda. The stamps seem to go regularly in horizontal lines and I think there are places where stamps have been removed badly previously. To be honest I don't think this will ever be satisfactorarily cleaned up so I'm going to Oppose .  God Emperor Talk  23:02, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I think I got them all. Don't forget to purge your cache before looking. Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:50, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Still one on the corner of the pillow along the right hand side of the vestida.  God Emperor Talk  01:14, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * And also on her dress above her left breast and below her right breast.  God Emperor Talk  01:19, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I got those and the image is currently uploading (my connection sucks, so it may take up to 10 minutes. I have to go deal with applying for my masters, but if I missed any I'll pick this up when I come back. Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:40, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:36, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. Good work. Leaning towards support now, but just one more thing - what are the dark lines along the right side of both images. Are they in the original painting or a product of the reproduction?  God <em style="font-family:Copperplate Gothic Bold;color:Red">Emperor <em style="color:Blue">Talk  13:31, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I mean are they shadows or regions that had previously been covered up by a frame and so less damaged by light?  <em style="font-family:Copperplate Gothic Bold;color:Black">God <em style="font-family:Copperplate Gothic Bold;color:Red">Emperor <em style="color:Blue">Talk  13:33, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It's on the original image here. Looking at this I would suggest the area is generally covered by a frame. Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:09, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * This also implies that a frame may be there (although this isn't the same image, you can see that a frame was removed to make the scan of this image. I'm assuming the museum has an SOP). Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:48, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Support Pretty neat as a pair, plus individual EV —Eustress talk 06:52, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Support  <em style="font-family:Copperplate Gothic Bold;color:Black">God <em style="font-family:Copperplate Gothic Bold;color:Red">Emperor <em style="color:Blue">Talk  18:11, 10 March 2012 (UTC).
 * Support Tomer T (talk) 14:49, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Support famous paintings. Beautiful. MathewTownsend (talk) 22:53, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Support as per Eustress, they are ineed a nice pair. Saffron Blaze (talk) 23:42, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

--Papa Lima Whiskey 2 (talk) 17:32, 12 March 2012 (UTC) --Papa Lima Whiskey 2 (talk) 17:32, 12 March 2012 (UTC)