Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Fields Medal

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2010 at 14:42:01 (UTC)

 
Original (1 of 2) - The Fields Medal, awarded for excellence in mathematics.
 
Original (2 of 2) - Rear
Reason
A high-quality, rights-cleared image of the medal, front and back. Set nomination - I see no reason not to feature both sides.
Articles in which this image appears
Fields Medal
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Sciences/Mathematics
Creator
Stefan Zachow
You cannot use a scanner for three-dimensional objects. Further, as it happens, I haven't won a Fields Medal for outstanding achievement in mathematics, so don't have the option of redoing this myself with a different background (plus, I'm not sure I'd have the right to release the image even if we did: we have these because the group responsible for passing out Fields medals specifically arranged for it to be released without copyright. Had they not done so, I don't think we could use any image of the medal designed in 1933.
Why would you say that? Of course you can use a scanner for 3D objects, especially ones with limited depth like this medal. We have plenty of examples for that on commons. --Dschwen 18:29, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, cutting images out to add a new background - particularly in situations like this, where it changes the context from a presentation box to floating in space without the edge of the medal visible - always looks horrible. Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:13, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I know, I just saw the fuzziness around the coin and thought a scanner would clean this. Gut Monk (talk) 01:40, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, it's atypical. Most objects have a white or black background. White or black contrasts best. (Shadows are aloud, though.) Gut Monk (talk) 01:40, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see being atypical as a drawback (it might be if this were cartography); as for contrast, the medal is in no danger of blending into the background. Cowtowner (talk) 06:11, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's true. Cheers for consensus. Gut Monk (talk) 22:36, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers to that indeed. A second round to a support vote ;-) ?Cowtowner (talk) 23:51, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:FieldsMedalFront.jpg --Makeemlighter (talk) 00:29, 31 August 2010 (UTC) and Promoted File:FieldsMedalBack.jpg --Makeemlighter (talk) 00:29, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]