Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Saint Francis in the Desert

Saint Francis in the Desert (also known as Saint Francis in Ecstasy)
Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2012 at 17:15:50 (UTC)
 * Reason:Incredible size, great quality, nice EV
 * Articles in which this image appears:St. Francis in Ecstasy
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
 * Creator:Giovanni Bellini, restaurated by Google Art Project, nominated by GreatOrangePumpkin


 * Support as nominator --Kürbis (✔) 17:15, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Support - as big as the original painting, 100mB, seems to be a bit dark (but I have not the competence to evaluate the technical aspects in detail, i.e. the trees on the upper left point of action, are they supposed to be that dark in the original?), amazing piece of artwork (and I'm a Dominican - we traditionally don't get on with Franciscans). Has EV in articles on religious experience, artwork, St Francis, desert fathers (although it's a bit anachronistic for that), Order of Friars Minor, etc. St John Chrysostom ΔόξατωΘεώ 09:17, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Support - Yes, please. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:38, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Glad to see you, back. Jkadavoor (talk) 05:23, 10 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, as His Beatitude the Archbishop says above, it is dark. These Google Art images have been consistently so; as I have said before, I believe this is so that blemishes in the paint, the results of age, will be less apparent, even though it also means that details are less visible. Thus, I'm afraid I'll have to weak oppose again, as I have other Google paintings. It's too bad, because taking high-resolution images of these paintings is obviously a worthy thing to do. Incidentally, if you've never been to the Frick, go now. You can stay in New York more cheaply than you think if you work at it (and don't mind a shared bathroom). Chick Bowen 02:38, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Support Jkadavoor (talk) 05:23, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm having trouble with supporting this because the article has only two refs. Just because the painting was made by a notable artist doesn't mean that the painting itself is notable. If this picture was used in some article such as Saint Francis of Assisi in a way that contributed substantial EV then I would have an easier time supporting this. As the article stands right now, I think the article might be subject to AFD for lacking sufficient references to meet the Wikipedia notability guideline. --Pine✉ 07:39, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree that the article isn't great, and as it happens I'm not crazy about this reproduction per above, but I don't think there should be much doubt about the importance of the painting--a quick glance at JSTOR shows dozens of scholarly articles devoted primarily to this painting and hundreds that discuss it alongside others. Chick Bowen 23:29, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Support Tomer T (talk) 20:33, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

--Julia\talk 20:46, 23 October 2012 (UTC)