File talk:Secret avengers.jpg

Version selection

Ganthet2814 has incorrectly stated that version he uploaded is more inline with WP:Comics guidlines by stating that, "shows the whole team and is a better representation of the team as a whole". However every character represented in the #2 cover is also clearly represented on the #1 cover. "a better representation of the team as a whole" is a matter of opinion however the #1 issue being a milestone is more notable than the #2 issue. Also the lower resolution of the first version is actually more in with Wikipedia:NFC#UUI.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:41, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Further more Black Widow is missing from the #2 cover and is present on the #1.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:57, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COMICS states that the characters in an infobox image need to meet the following criteria:

Ensure that the picture clearly shows as much of the character(s) as possible:

The ideal image is a full-body, three-quarter picture of the character standing straight with no background, with a facing-the-camera or profile picture as the next-best.
If a full-body shot is unavailable, the picture must show the whole of the head and torso (or the equivalent for non-humanoid characters).
Visibly contorted poses should not be used under any circumstances.
Pictures which hide significant areas of the character in shadow should be avoided (exceptions apply only where the shadow is itself part of the character's look - e.g. Raven.), as should pictures where blur or distortion effects are applied.
Colouring should be neutral - pictures which have a heavy colour cast, or otherwise depict the character with false colours should not be uploaded unless the cast has been removed first.

The issue #1 cover hides significant portions of Beast, Steve Rogers, and War Machine, and the coloring is more stylized then in the Deodato image. Aside form that, Deodato is the main artist on the series, and your image is inclusive of the trade dress. Team images on most pages should be "virgin," or without the trade dress. Ganthet2814 (talk) 19:22, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By this the #2 cover also fails. It features a heavily detailed background, with characters in visibly contorted poses. Not to mention fewer team members are presented. Also the trade dress is perfectly acceptable per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (comics)#Cover scans:

A "cover" is the cover of the magazine or book as published. That includes the title, credits, UPC, copy, and trade dress.Where covers are not being used to identify the publication, but are instead identifying a character or element depicted, editors may crop images where either:

1. The elements that identify it as a cover are still visible

2. The cover has been cropped down to a level where such trade dress is no longer visible, as it is unlikely that the actual artwork is available to be scanned.

In this case the image is being used to identify both the group and publication. Even in a group only situation removal of the trade dress is not a requirement but editors may crop them if they so choose. --TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:44, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, the background is not heavily detailed, but regardless, it's still an image that is hiding much of the characters themselves. That alone makes the cover for issue #2 the better choice, as it follows the guidelines more closely. The contortion of the poses is immaterial when looking at how much of the team you can actually see. It is closer than the issue #1 cover, similarly to the image that is currently being used for the Justice League. Most team shots are action shots, and in this regard, the cover for issue #2 succeeds moreso than the cover for issue #1. Ganthet2814 (talk) 20:46, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is not an argument to be had but even in your example an "action shot" is not being used. Besides that point is mute since no such guideline exists. The conture of poses being immaterial is your opinion and likewise the exploding background. Also as I stated before more of team is represented on the cover of the fisrt issue. --TriiipleThreat (talk) 21:11, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not merely that other stuff exists, there is precedent in the matter of WP: Comics. The contour of the poses as has proven in nearly every other team shot from the Justice League to the Teen Titans, as well as the Outsiders, the Fantastic Four and the Invaders shows that the team shots follow a set of precedent that is better maintained with the cover of issue #2. Likewise, when a better image exists, the entirety of the team need not be represented if only one or two members is omitted. As it stands, #2 is a better fit for the article until an image arrives that includes both Black Widow and Sharon Carter. Ganthet2814 (talk) 22:08, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Various comments:

Image size - General practice with comics related articles is that an infobox image or a full cover sits at 300px across, max. It is desirable to have the image slightly larger than the display size and the Comics infoboxes cap at 250px across. As far as covers go, 300px @ 72 ppi is, IIRC, about 25% the printed cover area which is sufficiently low res. 527 is seriously over sized.
Terminology - Covers are what is present on the magazine as published. This includes the art, the trade dress, the UPC, and so on. Cover art is just the art piece prepared for the comic. The fair use rationale (FUR) should correctly reflect what has been uploaded and where the file came from. Covers have an advantage in this respect in that, as they are physically published material, a fair assumption can be made that the uploader scanned a copy of the comic.
At this point the Comics MoS only really includes guidelines for two things - covers and single character infoboxes. One aspect of the latter is generally applied across the board - the ideal is yo move towards the most recognized version of the topic. In the case of the Secret Avengers, since it is a "brand new and distinct" team, that would be the current/initial roster. There is no provision, as of yet, that the team image has to have the near full figure images of the members.
Using the full cover, or a panel as published is not necessarily a bad thing. We are dealing with characters in a work of fiction. Acknowledging that by using the unaltered cover or panel is not a bad thing.
Self titled series - It is also desierable to use the initial cover of a series in the infobox for an article that deals with, or should deal with, the series as a topic.
Using file uploading to change the content of a file image is not a good idea. Yes, such uploads can be made to insert a better quality image, but the content generally isn't changes - it's the same art or cover. And such uploads are made to make the image more closely match the FUR. These are cases such as where the uploader has specified "Cover" in the FUR and in use captions, but only uploaded art. That is not being done here.
Proper place - The talk page of a file is the flat out wrong place to have a discussion about which image should or should not be used in an article. This discussion should be taking place on Talk:Secret Avengers. And it should have come from either Ganthet2814 suggesting the change and looking for a consensus, or as the image on Secret Avengers being boldly changed to File:Secret Avengers 2 art.jpg and that being reverted (this would be the WP:BRD pattern).
- This is also the big reason why changing the content of a file is not a good thing. While editors do watch articles they contribute to or have an interest in, very, very few watch files. Changing the image in the file effectively changes the article without editing. Other editors will be unaware of the change, and some may not be able to easily track down where the change was made much less challenge it.

- J Greb (talk) 01:01, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

J Greb is indeed right but I'd ask everyone to take replies to the talk page as he suggests: Talk:Secret Avengers. (Emperor (talk) 01:33, 10 July 2010 (UTC))[reply]