Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Watford Jon (Argy Bargy) IMGP4754 smial wp.jpg

File:Watford Jon (Argy Bargy) IMGP4754 smial wp.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Mar 2017 at 14:53:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Watford Jon (Argy Bargy) IMGP4754 smial wp.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Watford Jon (Argy Bargy) IMGP4754 smial wp.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
•  Info all by me -- Smial (talk) 14:53, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- Smial (talk) 14:53, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment - I like the "Hey, you!" gesture and expression. What are we looking at that appears to be a narrow diagonal shaft of light? Is that exactly what it is? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:48, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support lNeverCry 17:23, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:21, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment Good stage photo, but I would also like to get rid of that part of the stage rig. Right now it is "impaling" the poor guy. ;) Had it ended up anywhere else than in his mouth/head, I don't think it would have been an issue. --cart-Talk 21:21, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

@Ikan Kekek and cart: That is part of the stage construction. Besides some basic corrections (WB, contrast, exposure, crop, perspective, dust spot removal, if necessary) I avoid any retouching, and I'm really not experienced to do so. I've taken slides for 30+ years, and I try to take digital images as authentic as possible, just like "enhanced" slides. --Smial (talk) 01:13, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

•  Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:38, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
• Thanks for the explanation, Smial. The diagonal is a bit strange, but I  Support, anyway. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:16, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

• Sorry, on reflection, the strange effect of the diagonal prevents me from considering this one of the very best photos on the site. So I've annulled my support vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:52, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

•  Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:38, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:59, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- WClarke 04:59, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose I respect that Smial doesn't want to mess with the image, but the background shapes stabbing him is too unfortunate for a support from me. If an object is growing out of someone's head, one would shift the camera. In a case like this where the background is almost black anyway, I would "darken" (--> remove) these shapes without second thoughts. – Lucas^T 12:25, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Ralf Roleček 16:53, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose --Golden Bosnian Lily (r) 16:04, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

  Golden Bosnian Lily, you are required to state a reason for opposing, only support votes are allowed without comment. – Lucas^T 14:10, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

•  Support--M★Zaplotnik ^(edits) 19:02, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose I do not like this picture (person), better not going into details... --Karelj (talk) 20:17, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

•  Comment - Not liking a person seems to me like an improper basis for opposing a feature for a photo of him. What does everyone think about this? Should a vote on this basis be annulled, as not about the photo? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:05, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
• I agree with Ikan. Karelj, please provide an argument against this as a photograph, opposing for personal reasons or just hinting at them is not valid in my opinion. – Lucas^T 14:08, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

• The personal feeling about image is (in my opinion) the first point for image judgement. If I like it, I shall start to look on its technical quality and other criterion. If not, I will vote against. (I had simlar discussion about image File:John Meintz, punished during World War I - NARA - 283633 - restored.jpg), where I gave the same arguments. I believe, that we give our votes as human beings, not as robots looking for only technical parameters of image. In opposite case, the choise of featured pictures could be really done by some sophisticated Bot without peoples participation. --Karelj (talk) 16:27, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

• Karelj, I strongly agree that the personal feeling towards an image is important, but what you did is use your opinion about a person as the sole point of your critique of a photo of said person. In your logic even a phenomenal image of that person would need to be rejected. Isn't that hugely unfair against the photographer and backwards? We critique photographs at FPC, on technical and emotional merit, but please not people. – Lucas^T 17:40, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

• Well, I think, that it is better to say, that I do not like the object of image (no matter, if it is person, animal, thing, fish... anything). Just after first look at this photo I feel - this should not be a FP. I do not want, picture like that will be some day on homepage of Commons and I will not be ashamed as one of Commons authors.--Karelj (talk) 19:44, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 23:13, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People