Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/The Death of General Wolfe
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] The Death of General Wolfe
The Death of General Wolfe, painted by Benjamin West in 1770, is probably the most often reproduced image of pre-confederation Canada. It depicts one of the absolute most important events in Canadian history: the battle that put French Canada under British rule. The image contributes to several key articles, such as British Empire, Canada, History of Canada, and Artistic licence, in addition to having its own article. In terms of quality, for a 200-year-old painting its resolution is quite good.
- Nominate and support. - Arctic Gnome 19:39, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
- Support TomStar81 (Talk) 01:03, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. We need really high standards when in comes to reproductions of famous paintings. This is a pretty big painting (151 cm x 213 cm = 5 ft x 7 ft), and it's not nearly optimum detail at this resolution.--ragesoss 02:09, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose Blurriness, washed out, pretty bad JPEG artifacts. --Dgies 04:01, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Could you please explain what you mean by "JPEG artifacts". The example images of JPEG artifacts are divided into little squares, and after zooming into this image I don't see any such squares. I can't find anything "pretty bad" with this image other than the graininess that comes from it being a painting rather than a photo. --Arctic Gnome 04:29, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- It may not be JPEG artifacts that Dgies is referring to, but instead the printing pattern from whatever book this was scanned from. JPEG artifacts are also there, though they are a bit more subtle.--ragesoss 04:57, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- There's some of both. For JPEG artifacts, look at the area below where Gen. Wolfe's hand is touching the ground. --Dgies 05:37, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- It may not be JPEG artifacts that Dgies is referring to, but instead the printing pattern from whatever book this was scanned from. JPEG artifacts are also there, though they are a bit more subtle.--ragesoss 04:57, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Could you please explain what you mean by "JPEG artifacts". The example images of JPEG artifacts are divided into little squares, and after zooming into this image I don't see any such squares. I can't find anything "pretty bad" with this image other than the graininess that comes from it being a painting rather than a photo. --Arctic Gnome 04:29, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Oppose picture I would fully support this painting if the picture was a higher quality. Sadly, it is not. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 05:43, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Not promoted --KFP (talk | contribs) 15:28, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
