Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Peter Sellers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 18 Jun 2013 at 23:23:07 (UTC)

OriginalPeter Sellers, British actor, comedian and mystery in 1973.
Edit redux – Removed eyebrow scratch, fixed missing iris piece, removed black spots, hairs, and diminished some artifacts (?) on cardigan.
Reason
High quality image, a relaxed portrait of a man who we're not going to get anymore pictures of.
Articles in which this image appears
Peter Sellers, +5
FP category for this image
People - Entertainment
Creator
Allan warren (We've featured his work before, and there's certainly more to come)
  • I've reverted the size increase per WP:IMGSIZE. There's no justification for this other than that some folk like bigger pictures. TCO, if you have a problem with the default image width for thumbnails and/or infoboxes, take this up with MOS. Colin°Talk 11:05, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • It isn't about what looks better for one person. The current defaults for thumbnails and info boxes are a compromise set by the community for a variety of users with different needs. TCO seems to want every pic he sees to be a bit larger. But hard-coding sizes per-article is the worse possible solution. Colin°Talk 17:21, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Don't get me wrong, I see that aspect entirely. It's the sort of thing that I don't much care to quibble about; it's not why I come on to edit. To keep it simple in the future I won't indulge. Cowtowner (talk) 19:06, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is so frustrating, and I'm sure Colin's going to have a field day with me again lol. The original image doesn't have an sRGB profile. So what am I supposed to do? Okay, I'm going to try something and it means redoing the whole thing all over again. I'll tell Photoshop not to color manage, and when the image looks funky to me, maybe that means it's normal to everyone else. I'm on a brand new macbook pro, I don't understand why my monitor would be so different. btw, the two images looked exactly the same to me. – Kerαunoςcopiagalaxies 04:48, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ok quick test: can you download the image from my dropbox [link redacted (file removed)] and open it in your browser and tell me how it looks? If everything's copacetic, I'll redo the edit tomorrow. – Kerαunoςcopiagalaxies 04:59, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strange that it's happening to you on a Macbook Pro; that's what I use as well, and to my recollection haven't ever come across something similar. The image from your dropbox shows now signs of mysterious colour alterations. So sorry that you keep getting sent back to the drawing board! Cowtowner (talk) 15:29, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maybe I have my Photoshop set up incorrectly. Anyway, I really appreciate your checking. I opened the file in PS and left it "as is (don't color manage)", and resaved it. It appears this is the secret. If a file comes with a profile embedded, I don't seem to have any problems—or at least no one's spoken up. It's always been when I try to attach an sRGB profile to a no-color-profile-embedded file that problems arise. I'm almost done, will have it up in a few. – Kerαunoςcopiagalaxies 15:54, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks good to me, I'm sure Pete appreciates the reconstructive eye surgery. Colours haven't changed, either! I guess your photoshop is trying to compensate colour profile that isn't there; at least now you've got the problem figured. Thanks for doing the restoration work. Cheers, Cowtowner (talk) 16:58, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for letting me know in the first place. I am now seriously wondering how many photos I've worked on that are completely not what I intended them on being. – Kerαunoςcopiagalaxies 17:28, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Colin, SchroCat, Cassianto, TCO? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:43, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm ok with it. SchroCat is on holiday, so there maybe a delay in him answering. I can't see it being an issue though. -- CassiantoTalk 09:27, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I thought the presumption with alts (especially relatively uncontroversial ones like this) is that if no objections are raised and other nominators support them, they are tacitly accepted? (Not that I'm at all opposed to ensuring everyone is on the same page, but if things need to be moved along) Cowtowner (talk) 10:38, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I cannot close this one (I've voted above). I don't know why Armbrust (who's done most of the closing recently) hasn't closed this, as s/he hasn't voted, but if its because of a lack of explicit support for the alt I just want to make sure we cross that t. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:35, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Peter Sellers at home in Belgravia, London, 1973.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 15:51, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]