Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/The Death of General Mercer at the Battle of Princeton, January 3, 1777

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2016 at 14:35:55 (UTC)

Reason: High quality, historic and symbolic image, favorite of John Trumbull
Articles in which this image appears: The Death of General Mercer at the Battle of Princeton, January 3, 1777, Battle of Princeton, William Leslie
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
Creator: Zeete

Support as nominator – Zeete (talk) 14:35, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support - EV looks good. Quality appears great. Étienne Dolet (talk) 21:46, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A little small compared to our other painting scans. Did Google do this one when they were at Yale? If so, there may be another version on Commons. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:28, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is the full size tif from Yale, which I converted to jpeg. Is there a better way? Thanks for any help. Zeete (talk) 12:55, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Yale may have this as the full download size, but that doesn't mean this is the largest available. Since we have a plethora of paintings come through here, many of which are of considerably higher resolution (even when the paintings are smaller than this one), I'm not quite sure this current digitization is up to FPC snuff. Yes, the criteria only stipulates 1500 * 1500, but the bar's been set very high for paintings. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:08, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can see this is the best available. It's only 100PPI by my quick calculation, which isn't really enough to my eye. I think pixels per inch is more relevant than absolute resolution when it comes to digitisations of paintings. This resolution would be fine for a smaller work but for this size, while a nice clear image, the detail is rather limited in comparison with the best images available on wikipedia. - Wolftick (talk) 01:57, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hence my point about about many being smaller. Yes, PPI is much more valuable in this context, but not everyone understands that measure. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 09:09, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The size of the tif/jpeg is 3,000 × 2,005 and this is for the 30x20 inch painting, not the wall size at the Wadsworth. I noticed Trumbull's Declaration of Independence was 3,000 × 1,970 for a painting 18x12 feet. But this was approved in 2008. Could this be a question of the conversion quality from the tif? Thanks. Zeete (talk) 16:08, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have opposed, quite frankly, and that 2008 promotion was well before our plethora of painting FPs. This painting is roughly the same size, but more than 4 times the resolution in digital form.

I'm not opposing here, but I can't support either. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 09:09, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Jobas (talk) 14:36, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support For the painting alone, it is not very big. But the EV is high with the article. – Yann (talk) 19:10, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:37, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The nomination didn't reach the neccessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:37, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]