Support as nominator Some more restoration was done, which I think was not taken into account during last nomination. –
Yann (
talk)
14:50, 13 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Support. If this was a modern photo I'd complain that it's too soft, but that's more than made up for by the historic value of the subject and photographer. We actually have quite a few
photos of Bernhardt by Nadar but this one is a good choice of composition and in much better quality than the others. —
David Eppstein (
talk)
17:56, 13 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Comment On the one hand, it's a brilliant restoration. On the other, I do think the original colours (
File:Nadar, Sarah Bernhardt - Getty Museum.jpg) make the details pop a lot more, especially the hair/background distinction, and I'm really, really not a fan of arbitrary conversion to greyscale of images that weren't originally. I don't suppose you saved a copy of the restoration before levels and saturation? As it is, I think I'm kind of leaning neutral. I certainly do not want to oppose it. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 6.8% of all
FPs15:19, 14 July 2019 (UTC)reply
@
Adam Cuerden: I usually correct the levels and the saturation before doing the restoration. And what make you say that the original is not greyscale? To me, the only colors there is the frame. Regards,
Yann (
talk)
17:28, 14 July 2019 (UTC)reply
It's sepia. There's two or three chemical processes that can be used, one gives more brownish tones, the other the more almost blue-balanced tones of modern greyscale. This appears to be one of the browner-toned ones. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 6.8% of all
FPs18:36, 14 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Support as nominator Some more restoration was done, which I think was not taken into account during last nomination. –
Yann (
talk)
14:50, 13 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Support. If this was a modern photo I'd complain that it's too soft, but that's more than made up for by the historic value of the subject and photographer. We actually have quite a few
photos of Bernhardt by Nadar but this one is a good choice of composition and in much better quality than the others. —
David Eppstein (
talk)
17:56, 13 July 2019 (UTC)reply
Comment On the one hand, it's a brilliant restoration. On the other, I do think the original colours (
File:Nadar, Sarah Bernhardt - Getty Museum.jpg) make the details pop a lot more, especially the hair/background distinction, and I'm really, really not a fan of arbitrary conversion to greyscale of images that weren't originally. I don't suppose you saved a copy of the restoration before levels and saturation? As it is, I think I'm kind of leaning neutral. I certainly do not want to oppose it. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 6.8% of all
FPs15:19, 14 July 2019 (UTC)reply
@
Adam Cuerden: I usually correct the levels and the saturation before doing the restoration. And what make you say that the original is not greyscale? To me, the only colors there is the frame. Regards,
Yann (
talk)
17:28, 14 July 2019 (UTC)reply
It's sepia. There's two or three chemical processes that can be used, one gives more brownish tones, the other the more almost blue-balanced tones of modern greyscale. This appears to be one of the browner-toned ones. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 6.8% of all
FPs18:36, 14 July 2019 (UTC)reply