Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Shepherd

Shepherd


Nice photo showing hard man in Montana countryside. You can almost imagine this shepherd's freedom and pride. Photographed by Russell Lee. PD photo from Library of Congress.

Comment - Here is a fixed version. I removed the color cast and clarified it a bit. I also tried to smooth over the sky as much as possible while maintaining the integrity of the clouds. Oh, and I also healed out all of the scratches and dust spots. I feel the rest of the artifacting is negligible, so I will Support this version. It really is a beautiful photo.PiccoloNamek 07:44, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Nominate and support. - Darwinek 19:08, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * There's a particularly bad scratch in the sky and some overall dust; also compression artifacts (especially around the horse's nose, between the horse and the sky, and between rider and the sky). The scratch and dust can be cleaned up, but I wouldn't want to try fixing the artifacts.  Is there a less-compressed scan? &mdash;Cryptic (talk) 22:00, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I haven't found it yet. - Darwinek 09:38, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment - the sky is a funny colour 202.74.223.90 03:25, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment - the sky is in no way a "funny colour" on my screen - Adrian Pingstone 22:27, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Washed out. Enochlau 02:17, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't feel that this is washed out at all. I will, unfortunately, have to oppose for the low image quality that Cryptic mentioned. Raven4x4x 04:16, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Still oppose the new ones, the artifacts as mentioned. Enochlau 06:26, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment - could you crop it from the left to balance it out? And it's also a shame the guys eyes are in shadow. Renata3 18:42, 19 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment Uploaded another edit. In my version, I have enhanced the warmness of the photo (which I prefer over the slightly cold colors of Piccolo's edit) and have kept the file size small without too much quality loss. But a still don't think it is worthy of FP status because of the small size of the pic --Fir0002 06:02, 21 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment - Cold? It looks perfectly neutral on my calibrated monitor, and is probably closest to what was actually shot. The second edit looks very orange, and slightly hazy. Anyway, working in CMYK mode, I managed to "warmen" the picture in what I think is a more faithful manner.PiccoloNamek 06:11, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Support & Comment. Guys, you've both managed to wash out the highlights on the horse's snout as far as I can see (not on my usual calibrated monitor but highlights are usually not lost on bad monitors, its usually the shadow detail that is lost). I do agree that the colour cast is a little cold in Picc's version, and probably slightly more accurate in Fir's considering the shadows and therefore time of day, but excuse me for being picky. ;) My pick is probably the 3rd edit. Diliff 21:40, 22 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment - I don't think there was any real image information in the horse's snout to begin with. Judging the two pictures side by side, the difference is minimal. The main problem with Fir0002's edit is that the horse has a very heavy and distinct orange cast, which I am positive did not appear in the original scene, or in the original print, unless it was a horse that had orange fur.PiccoloNamek 23:10, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, when I look at your edits, all I see is a washout on the snout. I haven't got an image editing program in front of me right now, but I suggest you use an eyedropper on the highlights of both the original and your edits and see whether they correspond. I know you increased the contrast so the actual values will have changed in your edit, but I suspect that if the original was just as washed out, you will see patches where the RGB values will be constant. It just doesn't appear that way to my eyes though. Of course, they could be lying but I don't think so. :) I agree about Fir's edit - it was way too warm, but I don't think the horse was quite as white as in your edit, either. You've overcompensated with the colour balance. Diliff 03:42, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose all four (so far); artifacts. &mdash;Cryptic (talk) 03:10, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Isn't 640x800-ish too small for a FPC? --Janke | Talk 13:37, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Raven4x4x 03:20, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

