Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Seth MacFarlane

Seth MacFarlane

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2013 at 00:39:30 (UTC)

Original – Seth MacFarlane at the 2010 Comic Con in San Diego.

Alt 1 – Seth MacFarlane at the 2009 Comic Con in San Diego.

Alt 2 – Seth MacFarlane at the 2012 Comic Con in San Diego.

Reason: Well, it has high quality, it has a free license, and it has a nice capture of MacFarlane in Comic-Con 2009.
Articles in which this image appears: Seth MacFarlane, Family Guy, Fuzzy Door Productions, and etc.
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment
Creator: The creator of the image, where possible using the format is Gage.

Support as nominator --Blurred Lines 00:39, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Cups in front of him are distracting, out of focus around the eyes, lighting is really harsh, and that means the image is quite soft overall. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:42, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Crisco 1492 Just being curious, how exactly is the lighting "really harsh", and honestly I have no idea what you meant by describing the photo "quite soft". Also, how exactly are the eyes "out of focus"? Blurred Lines 03:15, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You and I are looking at the same photograph, right? Try looking at full size, notice how the pupils are not quite clear. I had the same issue taking pictures of Hamdy Salad and Rachmat Djoko Pradopo at a recent event (though Gage has better equipment than I); the harsh lights directed at the stage cause softness to be hard to avoid, as the light reflects off the face. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:32, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Crisco 1492 Well, at least the photo is not too bright so you won't be able to see the whole photo. I personally think that when he captured the photo, he didn't have the lighting feature on while taking it, or probably had a auto-brightness on the camera he had so it wouldn't be too bright, or as you say it, "harsh lights". Blurred Lines 03:54, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose as per Crisco. Cups and the mic in front of him are distracting. Mediran (t • c) 02:00, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @Crisco 1492 @Mediran By me looking through Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment, some pictures I have seen had people with distracting items in front of them, one photo I have seen had a woman with a cigar in her mouth, so obviously your comments (judgment) is telling me nothing. Blurred Lines 03:15, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- About the woman with cigar, the image is a publicity shot, meaning the cigar is meant to be there. The nom image is not anything like that. Mediran (t • c) 03:26, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Mediran There are other photos that have distracting stuff, like what you describe the mic, I have seen some photos of people with mics and other stuff that you claim are distracting. Blurred Lines 03:29, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - I personally don't mind the mike, it's the cups that throw me off. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:32, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - OK. Could you please point out an image with distracting mics? For example, File:Sarah Vaughan - William P. Gottlieb - No. 1.jpg does have a mic in front of her but does that distract the viewer? I'm trying to be nice here as I have only gave my opinion about this nom. Thanks. Mediran (t • c) 03:37, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        @Crisco 1492 The cups were part of the Comic Con that Seth MacFarlane attended, the cups (or the mic) is not hurting anyone, so starting to throw yourself off because of the cups is so unnecessary. Blurred Lines 03:54, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        
        @Mediran It only counts because the woman is singing, this photo has a person with a mic blocking half of his face, that distracting. Blurred Lines 03:54, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Now you get my point that mics are sometimes distracting. According to the file description and the description in the FP nom page, "Australian comedian and TV personality Brian Nankervis during a live performance in Melbourne". Again, the mic is OK to be there. Now, for this image, it would be better if the mic is not there. Mediran (t • c) 04:02, 2 November 2013 (UTC) PS: Furthermore, the nominator's reason to FP it is "High quality image of an entertainer actually performing." So it is really an excuse for the mic to be there. DO you get my point. Thanks.[reply]

@Mediran No, because obviously it needs to be there, because without the mics in Comic Con, MacFarlane may have to yell what he has to say so large groups of people can hear him, that's why Comic Con have mics in the first place, so MacFarlane could speak to it, and then the voice comes out through loud speakers. So, actually, it is OK for the mic to be there. Blurred Lines 04:14, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If that so, you could alter your caption in the image (even in the file description). We don't need to be so literal like this. I'm still unconvinced for this to pass. PS: Don't argue in discussions as we can address this concern in the "nicest way" there is. Thanks. Mediran (t • c) 05:22, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Blurred: We are here to judge the image. Is it good? Yes. Is it featured quality? No. Why? Because those cups cover up his hands and distract from the image. That's not being pedantic, that's judging an image. Gage does spectacular and very valuable work. However, the situations in which he usually works (press conferences and the like) make it very hard for featured quality images to result. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:19, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose. I think Crisco's right about this one. It's overall a little soft, and the OOF cups are a little distracting. Yes, the cups were a part of the convention, but that's not really here nor there. Could a picture of MacFarlane be taken without distracting cups in front of him? Yes, quite easily. He's a public figure who makes fairly regular public appearances. This picture is very strong, and is an asset to Wikipedia. Is it among the best portraits on Wikipedia? No, not quite. J Milburn (talk) 11:55, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This new one added looks slightly blurry and is a bit noisy. It's also a bit too soft for my tastes. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 15:59, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Still oppose this new one. At 1600px by 2000px, there should not be any noise or blur for an FP. (That this has been cropped and/or downsampled is patently clear as well, though that's not a dealbreaker). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:01, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Alt 2, as the sign and the water bottle are distracting. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 17:29, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Still oppose. Many distracting stuffs. Not featured quality. Mediran (t • c) 03:50, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. None of the three images show any quality. I believe the nominator should get a better handle of WP:FP before nominating non-quality photos of people they like. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 13:23, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Blurred Lines 16:49, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn Blurred Lines 16:49, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]