Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Artificial skull deformation

Artificial skull deformation

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Jun 2013 at 20:03:15 (UTC)

Original – Proto Nazca deformed skull, c 200-100 BC

Updated – False background replaced with a black one

Reason: Very high resolution, excellent quality image of a specimen with high EV. FP on Commons already.
Articles in which this image appears: Artificial cranial deformation, +1
FP category for this image: Really debated this, I'm not sure there's a clearcut answer. History - Other
Creator: Didier Descouens

Support as nominator --Cowtowner (talk) 20:03, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:52, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Valuable, but I hate that weird, fake background. J Milburn (talk) 16:28, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not a fan either, but I don't think it's overly intrusive. That said Archaedontosaurus is the creator, so he may be able to replace it with straight black, as he has in other of his images. Cowtowner (talk) 18:23, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

* Over time I came to the conclusion that it was not a good idea. But in those days, I found this interresting technique. If I have time I will make a black version this weekend.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:40, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a good plan to me; if it become time consuming or doesn't fit your agenda, this could always be suspended for a while. Cheers! Cowtowner (talk) 22:02, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Added alt, thanks to Archaeodontosaurus' work. Cowtowner (talk) 01:25, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt Black background makes looking at image very pleasant on full screen. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 02:03, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt Agree. I'm assuming - since it's Archaeodontosaurus and he knows what he's doing - that the slightly odd-looking roughness on the back of the skull is genuinely there, and that's the only possible issue. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 06:58, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Very well observed, but this is not an error on my part. You see the skull at its best profile for the other side he took a hammer blow and was busted. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:04, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning towards support I agree with the nominator that this is an excellent photo. The scale in the bottom right hand corner looks like a smudge when the picture is a thumbnail. It's fantastic to include a scale, but could it be made bigger? If the scale was increased to say 5cm or even 10cm it would be more obvious and could hopefully remain discreet. Nev1 (talk) 17:43, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt although I do think that the picture would be improved if the scale were made larger. dllu (t,c) 06:22, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll third the scale enlargement. I had the same issue but since I'm not familiar with this sort of photography, didn't know if it was normal or not. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 17:53, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification needed': Cowtowner and Archaeodontosaurus, do you support the alt? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:44, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. Cowtowner (talk) 19:22, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Archaeodontosaurus? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:39, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Déformation Péruvienne MHNT Noir.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:30, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]