Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Zuni drying platform

Zuni drying platform

 * Reason:A 1915 photograph of a Zuni maize drying platform and women crafting pottery. Restored version of File:Zuni exhibit 1915.jpg.
 * Articles this image appears in:Zuni, Puebloan_peoples
 * Creator:Panama-California Exposition


 * Support as nominator -- Durova  298 16:31, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Question Would a contemporary (higher quality and colour) version not be possible or have practises changed? 16:43, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * In general, when the aim is to document traditional practices then period material is preferable to modern recreations. This is high quality photography for its era.  Durova  298 16:59, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * But if the traditional practise is still the current practise then surely a photograph of it wouldn't be a recreation? Guest9999 (talk) 19:03, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It's not going to be the traditional practice exactly. It'll resemble it, but people generally will take advantage of things that save a lot of work, even if they choose to live in a roughly traditional fashion (And, I will remind everyone, there is no evidence yet provided they do use anything like this traditional structure in the modern day). Shoemaker's Holiday Over 187 FCs served 01:58, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Support authentic material of a naive American culture ... highly valuable GerardM (talk) 20:03, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * A somewhat unfortunate typos there :P Sabine's Sunbird  talk  03:23, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Support as I said above. Shoemaker's Holiday Over 187 FCs served 02:01, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Support for historical value, though there are some slightly blurred areas. Staxringold talkcontribs 14:11, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose I don't agree this is top quality photography for 1915. Ansel Adams was producing top quality photography just five years later, for example. He would have shuddered at this one, which looks to have been overexposed as a negative, blowing out all the upper midtones; it was exposed well for the shadows, which still show good detail and contrast. Had this been an authentic scene and not part of an exposition, it might have gained some mitigation for EV, but I'm not convinced it's irreplaceable nor meets the standards we expect. --mikaultalk 23:22, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose Quality isn't great, but it's probably passable. I'm not so sure about the EV, though. The article placement deals with art, specifically pottery. That's only a very small part of this picture, and the pottery work isn't depicted that clearly. If this were used in an article talking about the actual maize drying, I'd probably be inclined to support. Makeemlighter (talk) 02:20, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose I agree with the above, at the moment the value it adds to the articles it is in is limited as the drying platform isn't discussed at all and the pottery work isn't particularly well depicted. The image is definitely interesting and valuable to the encyclopaedia but I don't think it's among the best we have. Guest9999 (talk) 23:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose per mikaul. Cacophony (talk) 04:26, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

No consensus -- wadester 16  03:20, 19 August 2009 (UTC)