Wikipedia:Picture peer review/Grant Glacier 1902

Grant Glacier 1902


This is an attractive landscape on its own merits and fairly good photography for its era. Particularly valuable as a historic/scientific document. Created by Morton Elrod (Glacier National Park Archives). Cleaned up version of original Image:Grant Glacier 1902.jpg. Appears in Grant Glacier. Comments: Seconder:
 * Nominated by: Durova Charge! 23:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The clean-up job on the sky is just fantastic. I'm concerned that there simply isn't enough information under the white lettering in the left hand corner, however.  That big of ground looks out of place and a bit bland; maybe just cropping the image is the best solution to get rid of the writing. I wonder what other people will think about the darkened left-hand side, especially the top left corner?  I think it's good enough to go on FP, but I also think this one needs more opinions.  - Enuja  (talk) 02:33, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The 1998 photo duplicates the location and angle of the original, so it's an advantage to pair them. If the newer version weren't so noisy I'd have tried to get it featured too, but this was actually the better photograph: higher resolution, better lighting.  I thought keeping the same aspect ratio as the other image was worth it.  The darkened left is something I could address if it really bothers people.  Curious what other opinions we'll get.  Durova Charge! 02:42, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Outstanding, painstaking repair job on the sky, but elsewhere there's quite a bit of original detail missing, especially large chunks of it on the lhs of the glacier. The writing isn't such a big deal, and the shading on the left is probably due to a poor coating on the plate, so as original detail it should probably be left as-is. Overall I think it was shot a little out of focus and the print &/or scan hasn't improved matters, so (historical interest aside) I'm quite doubtful as to its FPC chances. If you do submit it, don't crop it – despite poor framing – as the whole-plate view supports the historical value and the image really isn't strong enough to promote on the basis of the subject alone. --mikaultalk 09:30, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll keep my eyes peeled for a better example. I appreciate the candid feedback.  Durova Charge! 10:02, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

