Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Yekaterina Gamova

Yekaterina Gamova
Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2010 at 00:31:15 (UTC)
 * Reason:Strong and eyecatching portrait of a very high technical quality. A crop of this photo is currently in use on the main page. This would be our first volleyball FP, our first female athlete FP and (I believe) our first Russian athlete FP.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Yekaterina Gamova, List of Olympic medalists in volleyball
 * FP category for this image:People/Entertainment, as we do not yet have a sports category.
 * Creator:Platon Shilikov


 * Support as nominator --J Milburn (talk) 00:31, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Aaadddaaammm (talk) 04:14, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Btw, it looks like she shows a serve grip. Twilight chill  t   08:34, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Support - I was thinking of nominating it myself, actually. Excellent photo. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 18:26, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Tb hotch Ta lk C. 22:44, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose Not a very good portrait, IMO. The lighting is awful, causing a very strange look to her face. I can't understand why a photographer would want half of his subject's face in the shadow. Maybe it's artistic, but it's not even close to being encyclopedic. The other images from this shoot (see commons:Category:Yekaterina Gamova) have more EV but suffer from the same lighting problems. The volleyball is also extremely distracting in this shot. Makeemlighter (talk) 23:52, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose Half of the face is in a shadow, and all together looks really unnatural.--Mbz1 (talk) 00:18, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose. I can see the point of moody photos of musicians where this matches their performing persona, but I see no encyclopedic value in the shadowing here for a volleyball player. The volleyball is relevant, but a bit overwhelming. The main page crop is better, but still not FP IMO. Eyecatching though. --Avenue (talk) 09:19, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Support: great photo-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 20:05, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose poor lighting.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:17, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment It seems to me that the lighting is an artistic choice. The criteria do say that we're looking for compelling images, but artistry should not detract from the EV of the image for the purposes of an encyclopedia.--RDBury (talk) 07:44, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose the brightly lit and colourful volleyball draws attention from the person's face, which is instead rendered in gloomy grey. Purpy Pupple (talk) 09:13, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose per purpy purple -- Extra   999  (Contact me  +  contribs) 01:44, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * oppose good composition, good quality, but poor lightning --kaʁstn 17:46, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

-- Jujutacular  talk 16:22, 25 November 2010 (UTC)