Support Although I took the photograph, the credit goes to Miguel Antonio Martinez Pocasangre, who spent 30 plus years on his back, on a scaffold in a very dark church in Atotonilco, Guanajuato, Mexico. Before you vote, please visit this site with very brief info so you can get a better picture of what this is about [1] --Tomascastelazo00:23, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Question For chromatic aberration I understand a color cast. Unfortunately I did not use a color chart (Macbeth) so it will be very hard to figure out the real color. The church is very dark and to the naked eye, it appears reddish anyway. What do you suggest? In any case, without the color chart reference it will be an interpretation anyway... I shot this in raw, so I can play with the color temperature. I will play with it, upload another version and ask for your opinion --Tomascastelazo18:08, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Lerdsuwa, do you really mean chromatic aberration (CA) as a lens defect or colour cast as Tomas asks? If you really mean CA, could you give an example of where you see it? I fail to see noticeable CA in the photo. Tomas: If you click on the very general categories of Mexico and Religion in the image page I think you will find much more specific categories, which better match your photo. I suggest you only select the most specific categories to increase chances that other users can find your nice contributions in a valid context for Wikimedia projects. -- Slaunger10:54, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I mean chromatic aberration, not color cast/white balance. See the photo on the right for example, from top-left crop. You can see there is a thin red line along the head of those people, quite thick at about 3-4 pixels. The same red lines are actually present in other area as well. It's still evident when view at 50% (about full screen width on my monitor). This can be corrected and I am happy to support the corrected version. --Lerdsuwa15:29, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the enlightening zoom on the upper left corner. Yes, that does appear to be CA, and there is similar traces of fringing in the lower right corner. However, it only seems to be visible in the corners of the photo, and personally, I do not find it distracting.-- Slaunger19:17, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Is it really chromatic aberrations, not just the drawing lines? --B.navez
Oppose Who should be featured ? The painter or the photographer ? The painting is so so and the color-quality is really bad, forget about CA the color problem is a worse thing. When i visited the church a few years ago i memorized the colors more realistic and not with that unfortune orange look --Richard Bartz19:34, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment In this case, the photographer is just a medium who may/may not do justice to the work at hand. As far as the color cast, neither mine nor yours can be said to reflect the correct cast. The only way to do it correctly wold be to use a Macbeth color chart and adjust colors accordingly. What I did was to shoot in RAW format and then I adjusted the white balance according to the type of light, so as to get a what I wished for "correct color rendering". I used a long exposure and small aperture to get a good DOF due to the fact, as you may recall, that the painting is in a dome ceiling, not a flat surface. Also, it is a very, very dark church, so even if the painter mixed his colors outside, their cast would be altered by the low light conditions inside, at least to the human eye. As far as the panting being so-so, well, it is not the vatican, and a comparison would be an unfair comparison considering the Rennaissance techniques, budgets, artists, etc., etc. Its value resides in other variables, such as the rendering of the characters, their clothing, the instruments (of the entire works) that the artist used. Remember that this is a representation of an event 17 centuries later, by a person who may not have travelled more than a 100 miles from his town in his life, etc., etc. What the painting does say to us, from the documentary point of view, is the type of clothing, weapons, instruments used in the 18th century, for the people and artifacts of his time were his models. More than the quality or mastery of technique, this is a document that has many messages. And true, photographically speaking I may have screwed it up, but look beyond the photograph. --Tomascastelazo18:27, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Info created, uploaded and nominated by --Tomascastelazo 00:23, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Support Although I took the photograph, the credit goes to Miguel Antonio Martinez Pocasangre, who spent 30 plus years on his back, on a scaffold in a very dark church in Atotonilco, Guanajuato, Mexico. Before you vote, please visit this site with very brief info so you can get a better picture of what this is about [1] --Tomascastelazo 00:23, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Oppose
Comment Infobox need to be filled (date is missing) --QWerk 16:40, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Question For chromatic aberration I understand a color cast. Unfortunately I did not use a color chart (Macbeth) so it will be very hard to figure out the real color. The church is very dark and to the naked eye, it appears reddish anyway. What do you suggest? In any case, without the color chart reference it will be an interpretation anyway... I shot this in raw, so I can play with the color temperature. I will play with it, upload another version and ask for your opinion --Tomascastelazo 18:08, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
