Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Multiplane effect

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Feb 2020 at 21:42:03 (UTC)

Original – The Multiplane camera effect using three planes. Similar effects were used in feature-length movies by Disney and other studios.

Reason: This short video clearly demonstrates the effect of depth attainable in an animated movie by using a Multiplane camera. The unique visual result is very difficult to convey in the article text or a still photo, thus high EV. (Created from my own artwork made for a 16 mm film I produced way back in 1974, thus free use. It would be impossible to use an example from a commercial source. Added to the article over a week ago, thus eligible.)
Articles in which this image appears: Multiplane camera
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Photographic techniques, terms, and equipment
Creator: Janke

Support as nominator – Janke | Talk 21:42, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support – demonstrates the effect, good EV in article. Bammesk (talk) 03:28, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Theora is obsolete. - hahnch e n 12:23, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see that as a valid reason for opposing the video itself. (Please tell me what public domain format should be used? I could then re-code from the original ProRes file...) --Janke | Talk 17:16, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't have the option... Does it really matter? --Janke | Talk 17:21, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It matters. But for some reason, the FPC audience ignores it for video, yet would never feature a photograph in GIF format. VP9 is objectively better than VP8 and Theora. AV1 is upcoming, and should be even better. But if we are to feature video, it should use the highest quality free encoder at that time. Upload your ProRes file to Youtube, and have it take care of the VP9 encoding if you cannot make it work on your machine. - hahnch e n 12:27, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, now WebM VP9! Found a newer converter that managed it. (Thanks for the info - I'm not at all familiar with web video codecs.) --Janke | Talk 20:26, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You need to take a look at the quality settings of your encoder. Both the bitrate and the quality is lower. Is that what you wanted? If you encode with VP9 output the filesize as VP8, the VP9 file will be higher quality. - hahnch e n 13:37, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I used a web-based converter, with no choice of settings. Since this is a demonstration of the MP effect, and a tiny loss of detail (mostly theoretical, since the original is after all only SD quality) is immaterial, don't you agree? --Janke | Talk 16:50, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 21:17, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Obv. not a requirement for FPC here, but is there a reason this isn't on Commons? — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:29, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Feel free to move it there... ;-) --Janke | Talk 20:40, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Sure, it would be better to get one of the prominent examples from Disney, or something higher resolution, but it seems like a great encyclopedic demonstration. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:29, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Unfortunately, Disney is a no-no here, as much as we would love to have better samples (other than very low-res stills as fair use in certain articles). I shot this film on 16mm, thus only SD resolution. The entire movie can be seen here: [[1]] - uploaded 12 years ago at only 240p... --Janke | Talk 20:40, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
~~Conditional~~ support provided that the video is re-encoded. MER-C 17:34, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Done - see above. I also added a freeze-frame at the end of the video - at least in my browser, Wiki videos end very abruptly in a white frame... --Janke | Talk 20:26, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi 17:21, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]