Original - Reports show that homelessness is on the rise in Japan since the mid-1990s. There are more homeless men than homeless woman in Japan because it is easier for women to get a job (they make less money than men do). Also Japanese families usually provide more support for women than they do for men
Reason
A very powerful, high quality image with special EV. Adds the value to the articles it is used in.
Support as nominator --Mbz1 (talk) 23:44, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful oppose they say every image tells a story and this one definitely does but I'm sorry its too grainy. Maybe try wikipedia: valued pictures? --Thanks, Hadseys 00:38, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Too grainy"? There is virtually no visible noise in this image (taken at 200 ISO) when viewed at 100% so I am not sure what you are referring to. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 12:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, there is no visible grain in this image. Could you explain, Hadseys? —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 13:15, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I posted question at the user talk page.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:19, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry i meant artefacts, i mean look at the guys cap and for that reason im gna have to oppose. Sorry for the lack of clarity I know very little about photography --Thanks, Hadseys 20:56, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The thing is that homelessness in Japan has many different faces from the homelessness in other parts of the world including the ones I specified in the caption. That's why I wrote in the reason for the nomination that the image has special EV. Homelessness does mention Japan in few places specificly. Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 19:51, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. Still an oppose because of weak technicals: though interesting, the picture is of snapshot quality and the lighting isn't that great. SpencerT♦Nominate! 22:57, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Come on now, Spencer. You complained about the absence of the article Homelessness in Japan. Look, this article name is not displayed in red anymore. IMO you ought to support the image now :) On a more serious note I cannot agree that it is snapshot quality image. The manual settings - aperture priority were used to take the picture. IMO the image has good quality. Please take a look at the man forehead. Every wrinkle is clearly seen. Of course the lighting is not even because of the cap the man has on, but it what makes the image more natural IMO. The subject did not pose for the image, yet the photographer captured not only a great portrait, but also all the misery of the man existence. Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 01:04, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Enc. is not the only thing to determine an FP; the issue on that has been resolved. Technical issues: Blown highlights on the man's pillow and a blanket/towel he is laying on. Some chromatic abbheration on his hat. Distracting background (I know that this shows and actual setting, but a simple wall would have been a better setting that with all the extra plants and lights poles behind him). Overall, I feel the image is rather bright, and perhaps a later photo time would have been better. SpencerT♦Nominate! 20:07, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Clear artifacting and noisey. Seddσntalk 04:57, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not FP quality. Spencer sums it up pretty well. Makeemlighter (talk) 06:25, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
