Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Morning, Interior - Luce.jpeg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Morning, Interior - Luce.jpeg, featured
[edit]Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2012 at 17:00:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created by Maximilien Luce - uploaded by Claritas - nominated by Claritas
Support -- Claritas (talk) 17:00, 9 January 2012 (UTC)- Support –ElmA (Talk – My files – E-mail) 18:18, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
- Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:04, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Oppose -- Noisy, over-exposed. TrebleSeven (talk) 16:21, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Question - can you explain why you think this ? I can't see any noise or overexposure. --Claritas (talk) 17:40, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
- Info -- Lol,this is pontillism, a painting technique, not noise! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:42, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Facepalm - I assume the light flooding through the windows is the "overexposure"....--Claritas (talk) 21:37, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Comment - Exactly. TrebleSeven (talk) 15:15, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- I'm striking your vote for the meanwhile, because you need to look at the image at full resolution first. Then you'll realize that this is a photograph of a painting. There is no "overexposure or noise". --Claritas (talk) 15:43, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- Do not remove my opinion. I stick to it, and I still oppose the nomination. TrebleSeven (talk) 17:16, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- You can't oppose an image if you haven't looked at it....there's no overexposure, this is a painting. --Claritas (talk) 17:59, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- I agree with Claritas here. Yann (talk) 18:07, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- I have unstriken the oppose vote as nothing allows a user to eliminate the vote of another user. Please note that it is not even absolutely necessary to justify the votes, according to the rules. But I strongly suggest TrebleSeven to reconsider his position. Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:39, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- Comment Just for info the picture of this artwork totally looks like Maximilien Luce's style for me. PierreSelim (talk) 16:08, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
- I have unstriken the oppose vote as nothing allows a user to eliminate the vote of another user. Please note that it is not even absolutely necessary to justify the votes, according to the rules. But I strongly suggest TrebleSeven to reconsider his position. Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:39, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- Do not remove my opinion. I stick to it, and I still oppose the nomination. TrebleSeven (talk) 17:16, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- I'm striking your vote for the meanwhile, because you need to look at the image at full resolution first. Then you'll realize that this is a photograph of a painting. There is no "overexposure or noise". --Claritas (talk) 15:43, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- Comment -- The poll was restored to last version before the play. Please abstain from deleting the comments of other users. If you want to change your vote or comments, just strike the previous versions and replace them. Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:49, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
- Support I don't quite get the problem of the mentioned ”noise” and ”overexposure”(?). The documentation of the painting looks good to me. Also does the technique in this painting look quite impressive. --Ximonic (talk) 05:44, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
- Support Great work. The best "noisy" and "over-exposed" photo ;) Przykuta → [edit] 10:12, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
- Support I think the painter did it on purpose to make it noisy and overexposure. This is indeed an awesome art work.Trongphu (talk) 00:43, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- Support Cathy Richards (talk) 17:47, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 06:20, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media
