155:. Is it that famous? I'm no art expert but I've never heard of it. I can think of plenty more famous paintings... Anyway, I'm guessing the reason it hasn't been nominated before is because at 100%, the quality is quite awful. Very blurry/soft and seems to have artifacts, but it is admittedly difficult to determine what was on the canvas originally and what is as a result of the capture of it.
34:
313:
In my experience, though I support the Yorck
Project's goals, their reproductions tend to be of very poor quality, with loss of detail, poor colour reproduction, and so on. Comparing their reproductions to anyone else's, even of significantly smaller resolution, tends to show major flaws in theirs.
217:
Yes, this is a very famous painting, and it's great that we have a fairly good quality image of it here on
Knowledge (XXG). However, because this is an image of a work of art, I'd like to really be able to see lots of details in the art by looking at the image. I'm afraid that, even thought the
239:
to 2024x2777 (of course, if someone submits one, I would gladly support it). As for any artifacts, aside from doing a side-by-side comparison with the original, it will be impossible to tell what are actually artifacts, and what are the effects of 570 years of aging.
218:
resolution is amply over the listed minimum requirement, it simply isn't high enough resolution to really see the kind of details of a work of art I like to see in featured images of works of art. -
323:
57:
I wonder why this hasn't been nominated before. This is one of the most famous paintings of all time. The depth of the symbology and era in which it was painted make it utterly unique.
388:
124:
393:
42:
17:
383:
235:
Yes, the painting is a little fuzzy. But, I believe it would be quite impossible to get a more detailed version at any resolution
319:
369:
356:
340:
305:
284:
257:
248:
227:
209:
189:
168:
164:
147:
92:
178:
112:
88:
315:
331:
per Froth (:D\=<). This is a wonderful painting, but we could have a far, FAR better quality image of it.
201:
because of low quality. Yes, it must be a bit famous, since I've seen it in a few art books... ;-) --
336:
64:
100:
96:
301:
241:
182:
161:
140:
116:
108:
280:
223:
206:
177:
Yes, as the most well-known piece of early-renaissance painting, and the frontispiece of
332:
272:
254:
377:
366:
350:
80:
72:
47:
297:
156:
120:
84:
76:
33:
293:
276:
219:
202:
104:
296:. Visit the National Gallery in London, if you can, to admire the original.
68:
275:. I want that quality in a full shot before I will support.
253:
The years don't generally leave blocky gradients. :)
267:. One of the most famous renaissance paintings but
181:right here of Knowledge (XXG), I would say so.
125:National Gallery, London Collection Highlights
8:
43:Portrait of Giovanni Arnolfini and his Wife
18:Knowledge (XXG):Featured picture candidates
32:
389:Featured picture nominations/March 2008
7:
394:Ended featured picture nominations
24:
60:Articles this image appears in
1:
384:Featured picture nominations
93:Early Netherlandish painting
410:
370:18:24, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
357:16:57, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
341:16:49, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
324:10:31, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
306:16:47, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
285:03:56, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
273:this closeup of the mirror
258:22:53, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
249:06:47, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
228:19:00, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
210:11:23, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
190:06:22, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
169:10:44, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
148:05:28, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
113:List of people from Bruges
89:Early Renaissance painting
63:16 articles in total:
50:
36:
138:Support as nominator
316:Shoemaker's Holiday
292:for same reason as
271:quality. Check out
65:History of Painting
355:
101:Giovanni Arnolfini
97:Arnolfini Portrait
51:
28:Arnolfini Portrait
349:
167:
401:
353:
245:
186:
159:
144:
117:Western Painting
109:Flemish painting
409:
408:
404:
403:
402:
400:
399:
398:
374:
373:
351:
243:
184:
142:
31:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
407:
405:
397:
396:
391:
386:
376:
375:
363:Not promoted
360:
359:
343:
326:
308:
287:
262:
261:
260:
230:
212:
195:
194:
193:
192:
172:
171:
150:
134:
133:
130:
127:
61:
58:
55:
30:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
406:
395:
392:
390:
387:
385:
382:
381:
379:
372:
371:
368:
364:
358:
354:
347:
344:
342:
338:
334:
330:
327:
325:
321:
317:
312:
309:
307:
303:
299:
295:
291:
290:Strong oppose
288:
286:
282:
278:
274:
270:
266:
265:Strong oppose
263:
259:
256:
252:
251:
250:
247:
246:
238:
234:
231:
229:
225:
221:
216:
213:
211:
208:
204:
200:
197:
196:
191:
188:
187:
180:
176:
175:
174:
173:
170:
166:
163:
158:
154:
151:
149:
146:
145:
139:
136:
135:
131:
128:
126:
122:
118:
114:
110:
106:
102:
98:
94:
90:
86:
82:
78:
74:
70:
66:
62:
59:
56:
53:
52:
49:
45:
44:
39:
35:
29:
26:
19:
362:
361:
345:
328:
310:
289:
268:
264:
242:
236:
232:
214:
198:
183:
179:that article
152:
141:
137:
132:Jan van Eyck
81:Jan van Eyck
73:Oil Painting
48:Jan van Eyck
41:
37:
27:
244:Spinach Dip
185:Spinach Dip
143:Spinach Dip
121:Do Not Open
85:Las Meninas
77:Renaissance
378:Categories
348:. Grainy.
165:(Contribs)
105:Pentimento
333:J Milburn
269:atrocious
255:Thegreenj
294::D\=<
277::D\=<
69:Infrared
38:Original
367:John254
352:Spencer
329:Opppose
311:Comment
233:Comment
129:Creator
346:Oppose
298:Motmit
215:Oppose
199:Oppose
162:(Talk)
157:Diliff
153:Oppose
123:, and
54:Reason
237:close
220:Enuja
203:Janke
16:<
365:. --
337:talk
320:talk
302:talk
281:talk
224:talk
207:Talk
46:by
380::
339:)
322:)
304:)
283:)
226:)
205:|
160:|
119:,
115:,
111:,
107:,
103:,
99:,
95:,
91:,
87:,
83:,
79:,
75:,
71:,
67:,
40:-
335:(
318:(
300:(
279:(
222:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
