Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/The Fringes of the Fleet

The Fringes of the Fleet
Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2014  at 15:14:12 (UTC)
 * Reason:While it has fairly low "Wow" factor, this is the first edition cover to a notable book, and, as such, has very high EV. This version has been somewhat cleaned, but I didn't want to clean it so much that it looked like some new printing, when it's a year short of a hundred years old.
 * Articles in which this image appears:The Fringes of the Fleet
 * FP category for this image:WP:Featured pictures/Artwork/Literary illustrations, I guess.
 * Creator:Macmillan and Co., prepared and cleaned by Adam Cuerden


 * Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:14, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment - This isn't actually the version used in the article. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:26, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * *shiftyeyes* I don't know what you're talking about Chris, of course it's the version used in the article. Check again. I wouldn't be that stupid. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:34, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Say, what is this this blue phone box here..... oh yes, indeed. Never never. Say, support for the good quality scan of a first edition of a notable book. Before someone comments on the border around the book, I should note that the edges don't quite appear to be straight, and thus cropping to a true straight line may misrepresent the object (although, Adam, a black background like Godot's note scans may be more dynamic) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:45, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * That would probably require rescanning and redoing the restoration. Because the book is relatively thin, the white on the lid was more visible than it normally is, giving the grey. I've never been entirely happy with an attempt to change a background colour. Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:25, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I'll see if I can have a go. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:46, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * ALT added, Support original or alt1 (prefer the alt) . — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:25, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Support original or alt1 (prefer the alt) per Crisco. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 01:33, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Support original, Oppose alt. Photographing something "on white" or "on black" really needs to be done at capture or with very skilful Photoshopping + a bit of downsizing. Here, the cut out is fairly crude and has included the dark grey shadow the book casts on the light-grey/white paper (a mix of spine and shadow here, which is hard to separate). I think it valuable to see the soft/frayed edge of the book. -- Colin°Talk 14:03, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
 * My original cut-out had excluded the spine, though Adam requested that it be included. I agree, that area is a bit crude. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:10, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry! It just seemed a bit flat without it... Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:56, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
 * (I think Colin's including some other areas outside of that area as well, though... didn't mean to seem to blame you). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:01, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't think it is easy/possible to tell what is spine and what shadow but it sure looks odd against the solid black. -- Colin°Talk 15:52, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I could probably burn the spine/shadow area to make the jump less "jumpy" for lack of a better term, or revert to the previous version.... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:56, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
 * And that doesn't work. Oh well. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:34, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Support Original is better. Yann (talk) 12:19, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

--Armbrust The Homunculus 15:15, 13 July 2014 (UTC)