Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/The Starry Night

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] The Starry Night

The Starry Night is one of Vincent van Gogh's most known and reproduced paintings, painted in 1889. It represents various elements seen in the area surrounding the asylum in Saint-Rémy-de-Provence. Its impact can be seen as the inspiration for Timbres, espace, mouvement and Vincent by Don McLean.

ballance edit 1

Image:Starry night ballancing procedure.jpg

ballancing image used to make edit 1

Edit 2 - from last nom

Reason: My main reason is that is very pleasing to my eye and encyclopedic. Meets criteria: High quality (though it is jpeg, I see no artifacts, feel free to correct me, I'm not terribly experienced in image quality detection); useful to its article (The Starry Night); high resolution (more than 1000px each side); in the public domain; I think it shows as one of Wikipedia's best work.
Articles this image appears in: The Starry Night
Creator: Vincent van Gogh (uploaded by User:Thebrid on Commons[1])
Nominator: Will Mak 050389

Support — Will Mak 050389 03:45, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
support - does the saturation match the original? I haven't seen it. Debivort 05:06, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'm inclined to think the original is more greenish-blue, like this version. ~ trialsanderrors 05:13, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
  - The colour balance of this image was discussed in this previous nomination. I don't think anything definitive came of it back then. Raven4x4x 06:09, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Oppose Even more problematic than the colors is the provenance ('Can no longer find web site"). If we feature well-known paintings we should stick to official reproductions done by the owner or a source known for accuracy and not something found somewhere on the internets. ~ trialsanderrors 06:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment I still oppose the current version on the same grounds. There is no deadline to finding an authorative version of this picture. ~ trialsanderrors 07:34, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Withdraw I was unaware that there was a previous nomination of this image that failed. No more of a chance to get promoted now. --Will Mak 050389 09:48, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't think you should withdraw the nomination. I think you should let it go, and since no consensus was reached on color ballance last time, I would suggest we not engage in an edit orgy but just vote on this version. I'd bet there is a reasonably good chance it passes.Debivort 02:45, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, I guess if we keep long enough to get a proven proper color scan. I was withdrawing this edit of the picture until it could be proven at least. --Will Mak 050389 04:31, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

We need a proper scan of this great painting --⁪froth^T 01:33, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps this could be a chance to have a go at figuring out what the proper colouring should be? The discussion last time didn't seem to get anywhere conclusive. Raven4x4x 03:00, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
  - Maybe this photo could help. We could use the lady to establish the gray value. Maybe part of her scarf is an actual gray. That would seem to indicate a color balance closer to the cyan edit of the last nomination. Debivort 07:28, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
    - The MoMA website doesn't help. They got four versions, all in different hues, although the biggest one comes somewhat close to the one we have here. ~ trialsanderrors 07:33, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
      - All right - here's a shot at an objective color ballance. I took the image with the lady and the scarf, took 8 of the gray subpanels of her scarf and averaged them and then set the gray point of the image to that color. Then I matched the nominated image to the corrected image as best I could by eye. Seems pretty aesthetic, and it matches my recollection of the image. Debivort 22:58, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
        
        We can't know that the light falling on the scarf is identical to the light on the painting - and do we know the scarf really is a true grey? In edit 1, the painting looks a bit too blue-green. I made an experiment, assuming the wall is white, and depending on where on the wall the white balance is checked, I can get thew painting from anything between reddish orange to dark blue. So, it is almost impossible to determine the correct color without having a true grey card (Kodak 18% type) directly in front of the painting. OTOH, I think edit 1 is the best so far, so I'll weak support that one. (PS: Why did you GNU licence the edit, when the original is PD? A simple color correction isn't reason enough for changing the PD status.) --Janke | Talk 08:41, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
        
        Hi Janke - I know what you mean about different pixels on the wall. I think the variability is just color noise in that image. - that's why I chose several regions of the scarf to average. You could try averaging a region of the wall. As for different light on her and the painting, yes it's abslolutely possible. But most walls are slightly creamy versions of white, and that I ended up with that color on the walls after correcting based on her scarf is suggestive that the correction is somewhat close. I GNU licensed it because I couldn't figure out a better license, mostly because I thought VVG had died within 70 years, checking that, it isn't the case - I'll go PD it. Debivort 13:53, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Support any version that gains concensus. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:59, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Support edit 1. howcheng {chat} 05:59, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Support all of them! --⁪froth^T 04:53, 27 February 2007 (UTC)