Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Vitruvian Man

Vitruvian Man

 * Reason:High quality reproduction of a well-recognised drawing.
 * Proposed caption:The Vitruvian Man is a world-renowned drawing with accompanying notes created by Leonardo da Vinci around the year 1492 as recorded in one of his journals. The drawing and text are sometimes called the Canon of Proportions or, less often, Proportions of Man. It is stored in the Gallerie dell'Accademia in Venice, Italy, but is only displayed on special occasions. (yanked from Vitruvian Man)
 * Articles this image appears in:Vitruvian Man, Man, Physiology and many others
 * Creator:Leonardo da Vinci/Luc Viatour

-- Chris B  •  talk  14:49, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Support as nominator MER-C 09:10, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. It's tilted - it needs probably a 0.3° clockwise rotation. Someone wanna fix this up before proceeding? (I'm not mucking around with a 6MB file.) --jjron 09:43, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Support. I'd also support a tilted version, assuming the resolution and color aren't changed. - Mgm|(talk) 10:37, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * If it does get de-tilted, could you upload over the original version as it is also being considered on COM:FPC (where voting is at 5/0/0 after one day). MER-C 10:58, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * It looks very artificial at high-res, possibly oversharpened and/or over-contrasted. &mdash; BRIAN 0918 &bull; 2007-09-14 13:32Z
 * Support - But the image isn't tilted at all! The framing of the photo is perfectly aligned with the margins of the sheet (supposing that the sheet is not cropped). What is tilted in relation to the margins of the sheet is the written text and three of the sides of the square. I think we should post a message on Leonardo's talk page, that was an inexcusable flaw regarding the actual FPC standards Alvesgaspar 16:00, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Like Alvesgaspar, I don't see a problem with tilt. The bottom is tilted, but the top looks fine. Puddyglum 16:52, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Support although I'd like to see a version tweaked to address Brian0918's points. The tilt is a tricky question. I'm surprised to find that the top and bottom lines of the square are not perfectly parallel (although the scale line pretty closely matches the bottom line just above it). A rotation would fix one, but not the other, and leave the borders perhaps looking tilted. Offtopic: This was used wittily in the award-winning animation KunstBar. --Dhartung | Talk 04:39, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Hmmm, interesting issue re the tilt or not. I'm wondering whether - given that this was apparently photographed rather than scanned - whether we're seeing some barrel distortion here. To me there looks to be a curve at the top of the page which could be consistent with this. --jjron 13:01, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * best is scanner, but which can do that with the original? --Luc Viatour 14:09, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * You're right of course - so this is a photo of the genuine original, not of a print or out of a book? --jjron 06:36, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Not book! With an exposure in Brussels behind an armoured windows!--Luc Viatour 06:17, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak support. It's pretty good overall. Tilt seems to be present in other examples too, possibly just slightly greater here. Slight barrel distortion. Query on colouring compared to other examples, see here and here for example. Those things result in the 'weak'. --jjron 08:23, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Support - Great historical image, good quality, tilt is not obvious, Overall very nice--  Chil dzy  ¤  Ta lk  17:06, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Avala 00:12, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Sounds like someone read The Da Vinci Code. -- Chris B  •  talk  14:57, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Doesn't get more encyclopedic. Buphoff 07:08, 20 September 2007 (UTC)