Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Thespis - Illustrated London News Jan 6 1872

Thespis - Illustrated London News Jan 6 1872

 * Reason:One of a very few contemporary images of the first Gilbert and Sullivan opera, making this an important historical document, and the only high-resolution version of it that apparently exists on the web (this is the only other copy I can find, and it's low-resolution and missing bits left, right and top).
 * Articles this image appears in:Thespis (opera) Gilbert and Sullivan Arthur Sullivan
 * Creator:D. H. Friston


 * Support as nominator &mdash; Vanished user talk 17:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Support, encyclopedic, high quality and of historical value.--Svetovid 20:51, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak support. I totally get the historical significance. The illustration itself is interesting, playful, dynamic, and well executed. However, there is something that is bothering me about a technical aspect of the image. The image appears to have been artificially enhanced to create a very striking contrast between black and white. As a graphic designer who works with historic imagery, it almost looks like files I work with that have been vectorized (eps, ai, svg, pdf, or similar format). For a raster image, I would have preferred to see a more au naturale quality. I would have liked to see the paper color. For an image such as this, I would have preferred it to be an SVG file, because the contrast and line quality works very well for that sort of thing. Sorry if that is a bit too technical/nit-picky. I still support this image, but would strongly support either a vector conversion of this file, or an image that shows over 100 years of aging and paper wear.-Andrew c 15:13, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment/Question What is the provenience of this picture? What I mean is, is this a scan of the actual newspaper clipping, a fresh printing from the original woodcut/engraving, a handmade reproduction of the original, etc? My concerns are very similar to Andrew's (above). Matt Deres 00:58, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Scan of a good-quality photocopy of a well-preserved original, with a little adjustment to remove the grey. I've done research in various libraries; few of them let you take archival books with you, or have scanners available, but most allow photocopying. Vanished user talk 01:35, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Do you have the unaltered version still available? The reason I ask is that, to me, the picture seems un-naturally bright and defined - I doubt it looked that good the day it was printed, which is actually a bit of a detraction as far as how encyclopedic the picture is. Matt Deres 22:47, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, but it really does look like that. I've gone through hundreds of engravings from this magazine, and they really did do a superb job. Indeed, their art sections usw engravings of paintings that rival the originals.
 * Here's another, for comparison. Franco-Prussian war. I've scanned this one straight in, with no levels alteration.
 * Wow, that's great quality. I guess that was my only concern, so I'll support. Nice finds! Matt Deres 14:34, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Vanished user talk 02:04, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong support Exquisite detail and needless to say, choice of subject. Gives an insight into the remnants of a bygone age; in my opinion it is the archetype of an encyclopaedic image. It is a bit of a change to the usual too. Chris Buttigiegtalk 21:21, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

--Raven4x4x 04:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)