Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/James Webb image of the Carina Nebula

James Webb image of the Carina Nebula

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 22 Jul 2022 at 16:06:30 (UTC)

Reason: High-quality, high-resolution public domain photo showing one of the most detailed astronomical images ever produced
Articles in which this image appears: James Webb Space Telescope, Carina Nebula
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Looking out#Nebulae, stars, supernovae and the Milky Way
Creator: NASA

Support as nominator – Ddevault (talk) 16:06, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Beautiful. --Mosbatho (talk) 16:12, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Before you go further with this nomination, please sort out which version should be nominated. Right now it looks like there is a file from a jpeg source upload on a png first file. None of these is the full and best hi-res png of tif photo directly from NASA's home page. cart-Talk 16:42, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The full sized images from NASA (TIFF and PNG) both exceed the maximum file size of Wikimedia Commons, I'm afraid. Ddevault (talk) 16:49, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, it's not the first big image we've had on Commons. I've now cut the image in half and both sections are avaliable on Commons: 1 and 2. This is how we usually deal with very large files of detailed photos. cart-Talk 17:00, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How can we merge them for this featured image candidate? Ddevault (talk) 17:09, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you can close/withdraw this nom and nominate the photos as a set (like this one), and displaying them side by side just takes a bit of coding. Here is one way of doing it. (Open in editing window to see the code) cart-Talk 17:59, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's better. Users are going to want to click through to see a larger version, and not in two different browser tabs, and at the thumbnail size there's no advantage to the split method. I think the better approach is to simply let users who want the huge version click through to the NASA source from the image page. Ddevault (talk) 18:03, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I found the full-size version here:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:STScI-01G7ETNMR8CBHQQ64R4CVA1E6T.tif

I put in a request to have it moved to the other page. Ddevault (talk) 18:10, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Someone found a way to upload the big file. Go with that. cart-Talk 18:20, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, someone updated the original URL as well. So it's all good :) Thanks! Ddevault (talk) 18:27, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the tiff for you and added the correct info to the page. Good luck! cart-Talk 18:33, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The secret is to use chunked uploads, which ups and file size to a Gigabyte or so. See commons:User:Rillke/MwJSBot. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8% of all FPs} 20:43, 13 July 2022 (UTC)js[reply]

Support Now that all issues with file versions have been resolved; it's a fantastic image. cart-Talk 19:11, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – taking exception to the 7 day waiting period, one of a kind image. Bammesk (talk) 00:26, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – I also think we should nominate the very first image that was published, i.e. the "Webb’s First Deep Field" image: [1] It's perhaps not quite as visually stunning as this, but your thoughts really can get lost among those galaxies some 13 billion LY away... --Janke | Talk 07:49, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Andrei (talk) 19:31, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Ah, the cosmic cliffs. Historic value and a shot of excellence. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 21:08, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Easiest support I've ever given. Immaculate. Stunning. Awestruck. Truly speechless. Blade Jogger 2049 ^Talk 21:16, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 14:10, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support! HeyElliott (talk) 22:14, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Truly stunning --Tagooty (talk) 12:40, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I created a JPEG from the TIFF: File:NASA’s Webb Reveals Cosmic Cliffs, Glittering Landscape of Star Birth.jpg. This should be featured instead of the PNG. PNG thumbnails have some limits, and should be reserved from archiving or non-photographic documents. Yann (talk) 18:05, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support, I replaced the PNG version with the JPG version, created by Yann. TheFreeWorld (talk), 18:54, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Big NACK to the JPEG version. I would never see this image represented with a lossy file format. I will change it back. Ddevault (talk) 10:09, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support the JPEG version. – Yann (talk) 20:36, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yann, did you really confer with the nominator, Ddevault, before changing the format? See above comment. FYI to all parties here, Yann has nominated the jpeg version for FP on Commons. Often the same version is FP across wiki-projects. It would be great if we could agree on one and the same version of this image. On Commons there are FPs in all formats, jpeg, png, even tifs. --cart-Talk 14:09, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
PNGs have a display bug that the Wikipedia coders have no desire to fix. Basically, they aren't sharpened. Apparently, this is a good thing because it can be used for specific use cases, which hardly justifies breaking an entire class of files. Also, yeah, Support JPEG. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8% of all FPs} 03:43, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The thumbnail is not ideal, but for those who want to click through to the full quality it would be a travesty if they got a lossy JPEG version. Ddevault (talk) 09:45, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are thumbnails and links to the other versions of the image on the jpeg's file page, as well as the others. Such crosslinks should always be present on well-maintained (and especially FP) pages. That way the image looks good at thumb and those interested in exploring it, can check out the desired version. cart-Talk 10:17, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, fair enough. I agree that the thumbnail quality is better and so long as all of the cross-links are in place I suppose it's fine. I put the JPEG version back. Ddevault (talk) 07:25, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@W.carter: Yes, I did, and I didn't do the replacement on enwp myself, TheFreeWorld did it. Yann (talk) 19:27, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Hope this will be sorted for the best. cart-Talk 20:22, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:NASA’s Webb Reveals Cosmic Cliffs, Glittering Landscape of Star Birth.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 18:09, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]