Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/MLK and LBJ

Reason

First off the image was previously nominated here on the basis of historical significance. I would concur with this reason but go on to expand on it in light of the criticisms raised. Firstly, the composition: this image is valuable just for its 'unorthodox' composition. No, it does not portray the two close together, there is visible tension--but it is all the more valuable for it. One would be rather naive to believe the Civil Rights Movement was all rainbows and leprechauns. This image has greater EV as a result of this. The second issue was on the basis of technical quality. It is admittedly grainy, but grain is part of the film medium especially when shooting indoors at higher ISOs. For the time, and situation this is more than excusable. Regarding posterization, I think it is forgivable to have some degree of it considering the shooting situation outlined above.

Articles this image appears in

Lyndon B. Johnson, I daresay there is a place for it in other articles, too.

Creator

Yoichi R. Okamoto, US Government employee

• Support as nominator --Cowtowner (talk) 04:32, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Question Why should the outcome of this discussion differ from the last nomination? Durova³⁵⁵ 05:12, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I believe he has already attempted to explain that in his reason. --jjron (talk) 05:21, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose The detailed nomination rationale addresses several potential objections which were not actually raised in the prior candidacy. Our current featured pictures regarding that aspect of history do not depict "all rainbows and leprechauns", so there isn't a pressing need to stretch quality standards that far. The substantive technical problem is compositional: both men's bodies are so far to the edge of the frame that there isn't any possibility of correcting for significant camera tilt. Nominator appears unwilling to discuss, so opposing. Durova³⁵⁷ 04:09, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • That's a pretty big leap to make, considering you haven't tried to discuss anything yet. Cowtowner (talk) 15:01, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • Did you read my comments at the prior nomination? Anyway, if the main intent is to illustrate the tensions of the civil rights era other Trikosko photographs would be better suited, such as the bombing of the Gaston Motel, H. Rap Brown, or integration at Ole Miss. We already have this FP of her work which is a remarkable display of a different sort of bigotry. I've done a bit of work with her photographs as well as the others from the US News and World Report donation. It's a fine idea you have, this just isn't the best iteration on it. Durova³⁵⁷ 16:44, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
          • Correction: that wasn't Marion Trikosko. Should've checked first. But the basic idea remains the same: when you broaden the options beyond a single photographer the options become even better. Durova³⁵⁷ 16:46, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose The fact that Johnson's elbow is cut out actually detracts from this aspect. Having a wide angle shot would be better to illustrate the tension. However this photograph is irreplaceable. I recommend a VP, it is an ill used venue for good images with minor, but critical, issues. Nezzadar ^[SPEAK] 16:04, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. Funny how the article doesn't mention how Johnson turned against MLK after MLK denounced the Vietnam war. This photo seems almost prescient of that. Kaldari (talk) 19:11, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per nominator. Sufficient quality, high encyclopedic value in illustrating that section of LBJ article. And of course, it's interesting. It's subjective, but I think it could do a better job than File:Martin Luther King, Jr. and Lyndon Johnson.jpg in Martin Luther King, where it illustrates their meeting - comments? Mostlyharmless (talk) 06:30, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • • It's just too grainy for me to support anymore - given that other illustrations of their meeting exist. Mostlyharmless (talk) 06:30, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I like that one so much more. It has that WOW that we have been looking for. I give you the honor of submitting it if you want. Nezzadar ^[SPEAK] 06:17, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that image as well, and considered nominating it instead. My rationale for choosing to nominate this one is it depicts their relationship, while the other merely depicts both of them. Cowtowner (talk) 15:01, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support this one and not the other. In this one Martin is expressing something to the president with a lot of conviction whilst the President looks like he's thinking "seriously?" In the other, they both just look bored, and you can barely make out the President he's so blurry. Also there is almost too much cropping in the other one, whilst I think the slight cutting off of the President's elbow in this one helps to emphasise how he's leaning away from Martin. This picture tells a story with a number of artistic elements like the flag behind Martin (assuming that is a flag) and his clasped hands which is a pleading gesture. --Silversmith Hewwo 07:42, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. This is a pretty powerful picture, but it is simply not FP material. J Milburn (talk) 10:58, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Sir Richardson (talk) 13:27, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Support It's an evocative image - reminds me of photos in Life. I understand that quality and technical issues are important, but I don't believe the crop or the amount of grain detracts from the image in this case. I much prefer this one to the other photo of Johnson and King linked above. --Kateshortforbob _talk 16:57, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Very eloquent picture. Lucky photographer.  Franklin.vp  00:00, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 23:38, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]