File talk:Paint Drying promotional still.jpg

'Not replaceable with free image' is invalid...

The Non-free use rationale claim is invalid.

The claim, "Not replaceable with free media because ... creation of a free image is not possible." is incorrect.

A free image is easily creatable. All that is required is (a) a brick wall and a pot of white paint and a brush or (b) a brick wall conveniently already painted white. This alone demonstrates that copyright in the film is highly questionable as there is no creative input to the subject matter whatsoever - not even the concept.

In fact, a suitable free image already exists on Wikipedia at [[File:Painted_white_brick_wall_(Moscow)_02.JPG]]. 86.186.4.148 (talk) 11:44, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A free image of any given brick wall does not have the same illustrative purpose for this film as a screenshot does. It is not representative of the film itself. The wall from Moscow is very clearly not the same wall in the film. That's like saying that any image of a building can illustrate Empire (1965 film). Di (they-them) (talk) 17:02, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree – a different image of a brick wall is not an adequate replacement for a screenshot from the film. The NFUR is valid and the image should be kept. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 18:26, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree with this point. You can't just use any white wall to illustrate the specific white wall from the film, if it's possible to get a still from the film. Dingolover6969 (talk) 22:25, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agree - you need the specific white wall from this film, not just any white wall. Defeats the purpose otherwise. ccixam(talk) 23:09, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the above discussion took place on a fair use version of this file, that has since been deleted per CSD F8. Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 20:18, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]