Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Boston, 1775bsmall1.png

Map of Boston, 1775[edit]

Reason: A period map of Boston, Massachusetts from the beginning of the American Revolution depicting the most rebellious city from the standpoint of British tactical interests. Highly detailed treatment includes legible descriptions of individual streets and wharfs. Restored version of Image:Boston, 1775small1.png.
Articles this image appears in: History of Boston, Boston campaign
Creator: Sir Thomas Hyde Page

Support as nominator --Durova^Charge! 23:58, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really nice restoration. --Krm500 (talk) 00:59, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Promote That is fantastic, and obviously encyclopedic. Great restoration. Fletcher (talk) 01:38, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No doubt - support. Perhaps only image name should be changed into something like Map of Boston 1775 instead of Boston, 1775bsmall1. M.K. (talk) 11:55, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That relates to sequential restoration versions and a Wikibooks module. Durova^Charge! 13:00, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't mind my asking, how come you've switched from JPGs to PNGs? Fletcher (talk) 18:51, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Per request. This was originally in .jp2 format and I had to change it to something. Do you mind? Durova^Charge! 20:01, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The main issue is that PNG files are not well suited to this sort of image with lots of texture (it is essentially photographic rather than diagrammatic). I just resaved it as a JPG with very low compression (11 out of 12 quality on the PS scale) and it came out at 5mb - three times smaller, with absolutely no perceptible difference as far as I could see. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 20:23, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Very interesting; I'll remember that thanks. Durova^Charge! 20:31, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind; I just thought the file sizes of recent scans seemed larger than usual. But if Diliff is right about JPGs I imagine that would be only for the final version, with PNGs or tiffs used for working copies. (?) Fletcher (talk) 20:34, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, usually .tif is my working copy. I just didn't need to convert the .png. I aim to please, though. Thanks for the heads up. :) Durova^Charge! 21:20, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support - well done Durova, again. I think I'll print this out and frame it now that I've just moved in a bit north of ... Mount Wheredome (?) de Bivort 14:17, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- For a sixteen megabyte file I found it surprisingly painless to print out. Think I'll make copies to pass out to tourists. >:-) Fletcher (talk) 22:33, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Can the lettering be made clearer? Greener Cactus (talk) 20:08, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Stains, dirt, and similar paper damage can be eliminated with the clone stamp. Basically it means constructing multiple source zones that match the target area in brightness, color, and appropriate paper grain, then going in 2 pixels wide at 800% resolution and 60%-80% hardness to trace the outer region surrounding all sides of each individual penstroke. The most visible area where I've done that in this image is the heading at the upper left corner. That took about 6 hours. I've done similar work on other lettering in this map, but not quite with the same intensive care. Is there a specific area you have in mind? Durova^Charge! 00:11, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Gee, looks pretty clear to me. Fletcher (talk) 13:16, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support very nice. Intothewoods29 (talk) 23:11, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Filll (talk | wpc) 00:28, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazing quality, well done. Spencer^T♦^C 18:45, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support, really great, but question: do your sources provide any information about the odd names here? Copp's Hill seems to be labeled Corps Hill, which is interesting, and what the heck is that "Mount Whoredom" just below Beacon Hill? Just a crude British joke? Chick Bowen 21:11, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent question. I retrieved this from the maps department of the Library of Congress, which yields a better file quality than a scan from a history book but omits the background on those interesting tidbits. It wouldn't surprise me at all if Mount Whoredom was the red light district; the eighteenth century was frank about such matters. Benjamin Franklin even published a pamphlet called "The Whoremaster's Guide to London". Durova^Charge! 21:46, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A bit of googling suggests you are quite right. Fascinating. Someone should start a petition to have that put on the street signs (that neighborhood contains some of the priciest real estate in the city). Chick Bowen 02:48, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I suspect this has something to do with the first part. Thegreenj 01:25, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support. This is an amazing image, in quality and encyclopedic-ness (encylopedicity?), and might I add that 1775 is the perfect year, being the year in which two iconic battles of the American Revolutionary War took place in Massachusetts: Lexington and Corcord, and Bunker Hill (or should I say Breed's Hill?). NauticaShad es 22:26, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Boston, 1775bsmall1.png MER-C 07:33, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]