Stumbled across this when looking into Easter eggs on DVDs. I think it's a very clear and decorative image;
It appears in the article
Easter egg (quelle surprise).
comment. Nice picture indeed, but is there a higher res/better color version available, perhaps from the photographer? The current version has been brightened and color corrected a bit from the original, but without a higher quality version I fear this nomination will fail. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, what is the copyright status of the image? Simply because it was originally posted on the Library of Congress website does not mean the author has released it into the public domain.
CapeCodEph21:54, 14 September 2005 (UTC)reply
I know nothing about the original image. It was sorta greyish so I downloaded it, tinkered with it, and uploaded it again. Sorry. Can't help. I'm not the photographer.
Dpbsmith(talk)23:01, 15 September 2005 (UTC)reply
'D'oh:' - I went off to chase up the chap who uploaded the image originally (not, I should make clear, Mr Dpbsmith of the previous comment). Looks like there could be problems with the user's whole image background, see the bottom of his
talk page, seems there's a lot of stuff of his that has been removed. Annoyingly, my enjoyment of the image may well lead to its removal from Wikipedia. At any rate, I made my nomination as a newcomer to the page - and accept that it is much lower resolution/detail than is normally seen as fit for a featured picture...and he doesn't seem to be around to provide an improvement or help us. --
bodnotbod04:19, 16 September 2005 (UTC)reply
Neutral. The different patterns are quite intricate and delightful to look at; however, the size and relatively low colour depth act against it.
Enochlau11:05, 23 September 2005 (UTC)reply
Oppose - Unconvinced the copyright problem has been addressed (see my comment above), and without improved color and resolution, the quality is far too low.
CapeCodEph20:59, 25 September 2005 (UTC)reply
Stumbled across this when looking into Easter eggs on DVDs. I think it's a very clear and decorative image;
It appears in the article
Easter egg (quelle surprise).
comment. Nice picture indeed, but is there a higher res/better color version available, perhaps from the photographer? The current version has been brightened and color corrected a bit from the original, but without a higher quality version I fear this nomination will fail. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, what is the copyright status of the image? Simply because it was originally posted on the Library of Congress website does not mean the author has released it into the public domain.
CapeCodEph21:54, 14 September 2005 (UTC)reply
I know nothing about the original image. It was sorta greyish so I downloaded it, tinkered with it, and uploaded it again. Sorry. Can't help. I'm not the photographer.
Dpbsmith(talk)23:01, 15 September 2005 (UTC)reply
'D'oh:' - I went off to chase up the chap who uploaded the image originally (not, I should make clear, Mr Dpbsmith of the previous comment). Looks like there could be problems with the user's whole image background, see the bottom of his
talk page, seems there's a lot of stuff of his that has been removed. Annoyingly, my enjoyment of the image may well lead to its removal from Wikipedia. At any rate, I made my nomination as a newcomer to the page - and accept that it is much lower resolution/detail than is normally seen as fit for a featured picture...and he doesn't seem to be around to provide an improvement or help us. --
bodnotbod04:19, 16 September 2005 (UTC)reply
Neutral. The different patterns are quite intricate and delightful to look at; however, the size and relatively low colour depth act against it.
Enochlau11:05, 23 September 2005 (UTC)reply
Oppose - Unconvinced the copyright problem has been addressed (see my comment above), and without improved color and resolution, the quality is far too low.
CapeCodEph20:59, 25 September 2005 (UTC)reply