Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Koch – Mayor of the City of New York.jpg/2

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

File:Koch – Mayor of the City of New York.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 May 2014 at 16:30:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ed Koch
One SVG version ensures quality when reproduced on paper --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 19:25, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Are you saying that rather than ink the artist, who's graphic artwork now resides in the National Portrait Gallery, should have used Inkscape and printed it on an inkjet? Or that someone on Commons should try to trace it? Some context: here: ""Ed Koch loved graphic art. He saw my drawings in May of 2011, invited me to his law office, Bryan Cave LLP, and posed for "Koch – Mayor of the City of New York". About four months later the portrait was finished and I invited him to look at it. He was pleased, "I love the blue lines! This drawing looks like me."" Dmitry Borshch" and the artist's entry at the National Portrait Gallery. -- Colin (talk) 20:52, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Colin (talk) 19:20, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Not my taste, sorry. Frankly, I find this design rather ugly. And I strongly disagree with Martin or Saffron, no offense. I cant share their argument for a support. I think it is not a good idea to "feature" any picture in order to promote "our cause", but because of our consensus regarding the own qualities of the picture.--Jebulon (talk) 19:41, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • No worries. I suppose this kind of work is not for everyone. I will say in addition to the desire to see more works like this I am still impressed with the work in and of itself. Saffron Blaze (talk) 22:23, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • De Gustibus et coloribus non disputandum, but I agree with you, we need more and more of this kind of major works, modern art under free licenses, given by their authors, here in "Commons". However this, in itself, should not be "the" reason for a support vote (IMO).-Jebulon
  • I think it is really great that the artist himself made this available under a free license. I can't vote on the artistic value of this – I have no expertise here. What's bugging me is, that this doesn't appear to be a faithful digital reproduction of the original ink on paper work: Most parts of the background are plain white (ffffff) where I would expect to see the structure of the paper. Also, most of the filled blue areas have the exact same blue color (000c8b) – you can't tell me that that's possible with ink. Some major digital post-processing seems to have taken place here. That's not necessarily a bad thing, as this comes from the original artist himself – I would tend to consider this as a separate work (similar maybe to Van Gogh painting multiple versions of his Bedroom in Arles). The problem I have with this is, that it is not poperly documented on the file description page, where it simply says "ink on paper". So that's an  Oppose for me at the moment. --El Grafo (talk) 10:13, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support as earlier.
1. I was away for a week; just saw the discussion on talk page now. Agree with the decision to remove the FP badge as one vote was invalid. And sorry; I should be more careful.
2. I remember that case. It was a strange nomination and from a newcomer here. As a result, he made many mistakes, including making "request to vote" on the talk page of many regulars here. I noticed it and discouraged. Now I understand how that invalid vote came. Not a sock as he is an established user at EN. But rules are rules; so we need another run. ;(
3. Hope this second run (due to my mistake) will not insult that very valuable artist. Jee 17:01, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Dear All, it's me whose vote was invalid and such situation arised. I didn't notice that I must have 50 contribution before I should vote, so I voted last time (thinking that the voting rule is same here as in english wiki). I am sorry for my mistake and assure you that it was unintentional.......Have a nice evening...Godhulii 1985 (talk) 18:00, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose per Jebulon. --AmaryllisGardener talk 01:44, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Thank you to all who supported this nomination! My image description is accurate: ink on very white paper. The drawing was photographed in pieces and reconnected using Photomerge. Some distortion always happens during photographing. Areas of uniform (blue) color are possible with ink -- airbrushing is one method.
"Koch – Mayor of the City of New York" has been exhibited at the Institute of Oriental Studies (Moscow), DePaul University (Chicago), Brecht Forum (New York), CUNY Graduate Center (New York), and Palace of Culture and Science (Warsaw).
Russian American Cultural Center on ArtDiscover
DmitryBorshch (talk) 02:04, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yann, I don't think this should be judged like a photograph or self-made-illustration where educational value of the subject might be relevant. Nor are we, imo, judging whether this is a good portrait of the subject. Instead, the criteria at "Artworks, illustrations, and historical documents" should apply. So one might judge if this portrait is notable enough, or a good example of a particular type or school of art (i.e. graphic art), or historically valuable. For me, I think this is a good example of this kind of artwork, even if it might not be to my taste. -- Colin (talk) 12:25, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 21:38, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Koch_–_Mayor_of_the_City_of_New_York.jpg/2&oldid=124008477"