Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ela Stein-Weissberger at Holocaust Remembrance Day 2013.jpg

File:Ela Stein-Weissberger at Holocaust Remembrance Day 2013.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Aug 2022 at 07:59:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Ela Stein-Weissberger at Holocaust Remembrance Day 2013.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ela Stein-Weissberger at Holocaust Remembrance Day 2013.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Women
•  Info created by Lance Cheung - uploaded by Kritzolina - nominated by Kritzolina -- Kritzolina (talk) 07:59, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
•  Support -- Kritzolina (talk) 07:59, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
•  Comment Impressive portrait, pity it’s so noisy. I’d crop off the rightmost 10 percent to get rid of that strange outline of her suit. --Kreuzschnabel 12:43, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
•  Oppose Not impressive for me. Technical quality showing its age. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:57, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel and Charles. — Urban Versis 32^KB ⚡ ^{(talk | contribs)} 19:49, 30 July 2022 (UTC)]]

Alternative Version

•  Info I uploaded a new version that hopefully adresses some of the issues mentioned above --Kritzolina (talk) 20:43, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
•  Comment I don't know if this is really an FP, but please nominate it at COM:VIC if it's the best portrait of her on the site. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:29, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

  Thank you Ikan, I am aware of the technical problems with this portrait, I still think it is an very powerful image of an amazing woman. I don't think nominating it for Valued image is useful though, as we only have two pictures of her at all and the other category seems too broad to me. Kritzolina (talk) 07:02, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

• It is a good picture. I actually think both photos of her could be good VIs. Maybe I'll nominate them. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:33, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

•  Oppose Still has technical issues. And even beyond them, it does not stand out from other contemporary portrait photos. Daniel Case (talk) 17:49, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
•  Oppose Still not impressive for me. Technical quality showing its age. Charlesjsharp (talk) 23:11, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

 I withdraw my nomination I withdraw my nomination. I still would like to ask users who stated this was not impressive to them, what exactly makes a portrait of a woman impressive in their eyes. I see a lot of images on that gallery page of portaits of women that show a lot less character and personality then this shot. You do not have to tell your thoughts out publicly, but please ask yourself - what makes a portrait of a woman stand out to you? --Kritzolina (talk) 15:11, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

•  Comment I think this is a very good portrait, and it certainly touches me, but I think that everyone who had problems with the photo as an FP except for Daniel was concerned solely with technical issues. Had the photo been much more nearly devoid of noise, I think there's a good chance that it would have passed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:02, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

  To me it just didn't make me want to know more about who she was ... Daniel Case (talk) 01:21, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

• And you want to find out more about most of who the other women in that gallery are? Or who the men in their gallery are? Is that the point of an FP portait for you? --Kritzolina (talk) 06:37, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

I clearly read the concerns as purely about the technical shortcomings from your comment, Ikan, but not so sure about others. If all "not impressive" votes are meant like this, then I am happy. --Kritzolina (talk) 06:12, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Not just technical shortcomings for me. A portrait should do justice to the sitter. This does not. The eyes, for instance. And I can tell you that my pictures of pretty birds and butterflies do much better at FP than drab ones. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:19, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

I'd be curious to find out more about how you're reacting to this portrait. What are you noticing about the eyes, and what strikes you as drab? Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:58, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

•  Comment Kritzolina, I am sorry that you have withdrawn your nomination. I had abstained from voting on this photo, but just for pure technical reasons. Apart from the technical quality I think this is a good portrait photograph of a very impressive personality. Please do not stop to nominate such and other photos here – we need some change from our usual subjects, and especially we need nominators who open our (masculine?) fixation on technical perfection, “wow” photos and flawless beauty. This photo has something which is missing from many of our featured female portraits: it shows character. --Aristeas (talk) 09:26, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

•  Comment I would like to endorse Aristeas' comments here. The portrait image of this remarkable personality has expressiveness and character. I tried to do an even better denoising, but unfortunately the technical source quality is just not good enough. For this reason, I too have abstained from reviewing it. I look forward to your future contributions, by which you make an important support to diversity. Best wishes, -- Radomianin (talk) 10:20, 4 August 2022 (UTC)