Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Marfino Palace
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2013 at 17:56:24 (UTC)
- Reason
- Good EV and high quality
- Articles in which this image appears
- Marfino, Mytishchinsky District, Moscow Oblast
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
- Creator
- A.Savin
- Support as nominator --Tomer T (talk) 17:56, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
- Support - picture perfect! Sanyambahga (talk) 09:02, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose Oversaturated (saturation +25, vibrance +12 in lightroom according to exif) and wrong colour profile for web JPG ("ProPhoto RGB" is only suitable for 16-bit file formats). Colin°Talk 12:01, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
- As someone who is not big on photographic skills, I understand the oversaturation, but for the record - colour profiles? Does it make a big difference? Would you oppose on it alone? (Colin) Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 09:51, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
- I would certainly oppose the use of "ProPhoto RGB" in an JPG and strongly discourage the use of "AdobeRGB" for Wikipedia/Commons. The colourspace is what maps the 0..255 values of RGB into actual red/green/blue hues you see on your monitor, or the ink chosen by a printer. Typically browsers and OSs are dumb and can only really handle "sRGB" colourspace reliably, as can nearly all computer monitors. Pro "wide gamut" monitors can display AdobeRGB, but generally you'll only see that colourspace properly when viewing with a pro image viewer like Lightroom or Photoshop. The "ProPhoto RGB" colourspace is one designed for internal use within a graphics tool, or for passing 16-bit TIFF files between pro photo tools. It is so huge that the RGB primaries are actually outside of the visible spectrum for humans, let alone something you could display or print. Because it is so huge, expressing it in a measly 8-bit JPG is asking for trouble like colour banding in the sky or on skin tones. ProPhotoRGB also has a different "gamma" (brightness curve) and other less important aspects. The AdobeRGB colourspace is really best used for photographer's shooting for print only. For the web, all our JPGs should be sRGB and should embed this colourspace within them. That's the only way to be sure that you and I are seeing the same shade of red/green/blue. Many browsers will not handle ProPhoto RGB properly and interpret it as sRGB, thus showing completely the wrong colours. The difference for AdobeRGB is more subtle but when displayed incorrectly, you'll see dull reds typically. See this old article. Colin°Talk 10:28, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the explanation, Colin. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 11:15, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
- I would certainly oppose the use of "ProPhoto RGB" in an JPG and strongly discourage the use of "AdobeRGB" for Wikipedia/Commons. The colourspace is what maps the 0..255 values of RGB into actual red/green/blue hues you see on your monitor, or the ink chosen by a printer. Typically browsers and OSs are dumb and can only really handle "sRGB" colourspace reliably, as can nearly all computer monitors. Pro "wide gamut" monitors can display AdobeRGB, but generally you'll only see that colourspace properly when viewing with a pro image viewer like Lightroom or Photoshop. The "ProPhoto RGB" colourspace is one designed for internal use within a graphics tool, or for passing 16-bit TIFF files between pro photo tools. It is so huge that the RGB primaries are actually outside of the visible spectrum for humans, let alone something you could display or print. Because it is so huge, expressing it in a measly 8-bit JPG is asking for trouble like colour banding in the sky or on skin tones. ProPhotoRGB also has a different "gamma" (brightness curve) and other less important aspects. The AdobeRGB colourspace is really best used for photographer's shooting for print only. For the web, all our JPGs should be sRGB and should embed this colourspace within them. That's the only way to be sure that you and I are seeing the same shade of red/green/blue. Many browsers will not handle ProPhoto RGB properly and interpret it as sRGB, thus showing completely the wrong colours. The difference for AdobeRGB is more subtle but when displayed incorrectly, you'll see dull reds typically. See this old article. Colin°Talk 10:28, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose per Colin. SpencerT♦C 00:49, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
- Support - I feel its a good one Mydreamsparrow (talk) 14:12, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 17:59, 9 September 2013 (UTC)