Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/White House at Night

White House at Night

 * Reason:Very high quality scan/photo of van Gogh's painting. Not perfect at 100 %, but it is 12,682 × 10,528 pixels so this shouldn't be a problem.
 * Articles this image appears in:White House at Night, Vincent van Gogh
 * Creator:Vincent van Gogh


 * Support as nominator --KFP (talk | contribs) 22:31, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose: At close up I see in the more clear parts of the image, such as the sky, some speckles that most probably are dust from the scanning. They should be removed to match as closely as possible the artwork. The image could be converted into tiff, restored and added both as tiff and jpg versions. Apart from the dust it is incredible to have such a file, so well done.--Garrondo (talk) 10:29, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think that not having a tiff version can be a reason to oppose. (I also doubt that the painting was put into a scanner.) However I notice that the original low res image that this was loaded over has much brighter yellows. Since Van Gogh's use of yellow in his late works is significant, I would like to be sure what the correct tint should be. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 17:13, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, a TIFF version should not be necessary, as there would be no additional detail to be gained from converting a JPG to TIF... A TIFF file would also be almost 400 MB (Commons' maximum file size is 100 MB). Even this JPG is already quite impractical at 55 MB. As for the colors, I'm not entirely sure. --KFP (talk | contribs) 17:05, 25 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I am not saying a tiff version is necessary. What I am saying is that the image has a lot of dirt that can be seen when using the zoom and should be corrected. It is most easily noticed in the sky. My hipothesis is that it comes from scanning a picture of the image (I am sure the painting was not put into a scanner).--Garrondo (talk) 10:30, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

--jjron (talk) 12:21, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Support - Ha! I was thinking of nominating this myself. Aside from the aesthetic beauty, it's incredibly sharp, high res, and encyclopedic. Looks good to me.  ceran  thor 16:40, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose (At the moment). There appear to an undocumented levels change and crop. Noodle snacks (talk) 10:48, 27 December 2009 (UTC)