Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Sultana (steamboat)

Sultana (steamboat)

Original - Steamboat Sultana on fire, Mississippi river, 1865 (worst loss of life, over 1,700, on any steamboat in U.S. history)

Reason: 1865 Harper's Weekly illustration of the Sultana (steamboat) explosion. Over 1700 Union Army soldiers released from Andersonville and other prison camps at the end of the war were tragically killed or drowned on their way back home on this overcrowded steamer. The image is freely license (produced in 1865), excellent contrast for B&W, balanced, historically accurate, unique image, good resolution for a historic image, no digital manipulation
Proposed caption: Sultana explodes carrying Union soldiers released from prison camps in 1865, the greatest maritime disaster in U.S. history
Articles this image appears in: Adds tremendous value to Sultana (steamboat) and Shipwrecks of the inland Columbia River
Creator: TeVe

Support as nom. At full resolution, you can see the individuals on the deck. Timeless quality, under represented genre in WP:FP. MrPrada (talk) 21:59, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose because it doesn't meet the 1000px-on-a-side criteria. I would support if a better resolution scan could be found. Spikebrennan (talk) 22:42, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, I can scan at much better resolution, however it will not fit into the scanner I have. I had read through the FP criteria and it said that exceptions could be made to the 1000px policy for historic images. MrPrada (talk) 22:53, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The new scan is closer to the size requirements, but the coloration is uneven and there are some stray vertical lines that should be cleaned up. What's going on in the corners-- is that the text from the reverse side of the page showing through? Spikebrennan (talk) 14:22, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Size. ^8th star 22:47, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, the larger version I just uploaded is a bit yellow. Not sure if you like the original better. MrPrada (talk) 00:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Its still not very detailed for an engraving. ^8th star 18:42, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose While I agree it lends tremendous value, good scans of engravings really need to show the lines that make them up at full resolution if they're to have any hope of letting the engraving be reproduced. Encyclopaedic value is great, compare it to other scanning FPs like Image:William Hogarth - Gin Lane.jpg. However, it's relatively easy to stitch an engraving together from multiple parts - simply scan it with your scanner, and take the pieces to WP:GL/IMPROVE. commons:Help:Scanning may also give useful advice. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 01:26, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per size requirements. Recommend speedy close. crassic!^[talk] 02:54, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Great image, poor scan. Letters bleeding thru in the corners. I'd recommend what Shoemaker said. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 07:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 09:08, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]