Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/California Trail at Humboldt River

California Trail at Humboldt River

Original - An encampment of tents and covered wagons on the California Trail along the Humboldt River, 1859, at a location near present day Wells, Nevada. Restored version of File:Humboldt River.jpg.

Edit redone from scratch, restoration credit for this version is Papa Lima Whiskey. Could be cropped/healed/cloned to remove bottom text if needed. Crop with text is File:Humboldt River Papa.jpg.

Reason: Period sketch of an encampment on the California Trail created by a man who made the crossing in 1859.
Articles in which this image appears: California Trail, Wells, Nevada, Donner Party
Creator: Daniel A. Jenks

Support as nominator --Durova⁴¹² 05:46, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nominator.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:18, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support edit Good illustration of historical record by someone who was there. Might be worth noting this doesn't show the infamous Donner Party even though it appears in that article (the Donner Party having taken place over 10 years earlier). Fletcher (talk) 23:56, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not the highest artistic value ever :), but a valuable encyclopedic item. Restored well. Jujutacular ^T · C 19:17, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Request: There's a line through some of the background trees that doesn't appear on the original file. Looks like a photoshop slip; I've annotated it at Commons. Could this be fixed, please? Maedin\^talk 09:33, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support edit. ~~Conditional on line being fixed~~. Mostlyharmless (talk) 09:07, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Suspended while we wait for a response from Durova. Makeemlighter (talk) 09:47, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll fix the line, give me a couple hours. NativeForeigner ^Talk/_Contribs 18:53, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Strike that,the GIMP healing brush is being spastic with the green and brown, and I don't have enough skill with cloning to get it to look decent. NativeForeigner ^Talk/_Contribs 19:03, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Unsuspended as new restoration from LoC original has become available, without the smudge. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 15:31, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Smudge is gone. Comparing the edit to Durova's restoration, it appears she added punchier contrast and saturation, while PLW stuck closer to the original LOC file (besides his adjustment to white balance). I have a slight preference for her version but am ok with either; updated support above to reflect edit. Fletcher (talk) 01:17, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Support original~~. I prefer its saturated colors. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:18, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The original has a Photoshop smudge and it would be unacceptable to promote it. Would you like to rethink your support? At present it is null. Maedin\^talk 06:37, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I'll buy that. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:00, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Per User talk:King of Hearts#Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/California Trail at Humboldt River, what I meant by this statement was support edit. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:22, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support Edit. I'd also support a more saturated version of the edit. NauticaShad es 12:04, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'll make a slight saturation adjustment in a few hours and upload over the top, though will probably not boost it as much as the original. I think we need to consider how likely it is that the drawing was ever super-saturated, considering the paper and materials probably used. Maedin\^talk 12:20, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've now bumped up the saturation a bit and uploaded over the top. It's not a big difference, but hopefully goes some way towards addressing the concerns. Maedin\^talk 17:01, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Edit Jujutacular ^T · C 17:51, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More comments on edit, please. Makeemlighter (talk) 19:12, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I notified everyone whose vote isn't so clear. We'll give this a few more days to see if we can get quorum for the edit. Makeemlighter (talk) 07:55, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support edit. I also think that Mostlyharmless' support could be quite reasonably interpreted as applying to the edit, since it was fairly clear from Durova's other uploaded images, all of which carried the smudge, that only a complete rework would solve the problem in a way that maintained authenticity of the original work. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 19:26, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have now notified [1] NativeForeigner, not sure why he was missed out earlier. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 19:26, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Because 7:55 is 3:55 AM where I live. Sorry! Makeemlighter (talk) 00:34, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support edit Prefer original saturation, but second is featured quality as well because of lack of PS smudge. NativeForeigner ^Talk/_Contribs 00:33, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I changed my original support to support edit above...wasn't sure if I needed to add a new comment down here. Fletcher (talk) 00:45, 20 May 2010 (UTC) Promoted File:Humboldt River Papa 2.jpg --Makeemlighter (talk) 22:02, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]