File talk:BG Sophomore ALB dj small.png

In response to the {{di-fails NFCC}} tag, there are several reasons why a higher-resolution image is needed to convey information that a lower-resolution image would fail to impart. In addition, the Wikipedia "minimal extent of use" policy is still met with a higher-resolution image.

Multiple details relevant to the story, and necessary to one's understanding of which portion the dust jacket actually illustrates, are only evidenced by a higher-resolution rendering of the illustration. These include the box obscuring the foot of the girl in blue, and the bracelet worn around her left wrist. The illustration's caption (seen under the frontispiece, which in this case is simply a black and white rendering of the illustration) is "The two girls ran all the way from Chadwick Hall." This line appears verbatim on page 82 of the book, where two protagonists—the eponymous Beverly, and her friend Shirley—run from their school dormitory in search of a schoolmate who has gone missing. Yet a close inspection of the dust jacket, and details only observable with a higher-resolution image, suggests that the illustration actually depicts a different scene in the book. On page 221 the same girls investigate the theft of papers from an office, finding "a box half hidden in the shrubbery" used by the thief to climb through a window. When Shirley follows in the footsteps of the thief she drops her bracelet on the floor of the office and is thus herself accused.

The two details necessary to a true understanding of the illustrated scene are the box and the bracelet. At low-resolution the box is hardly identifiable, and the bracelet is invisible. Even at 554x599 pixels, the bracelet is little more than a speck of color. Only at higher-resolution does it become clear that the illustration is not, as its caption declares, a depiction of a scene on page 82, but rather of events from some 150 pages later. Observation of the bracelet has the further benefit of identifying the two girls in the scene. Without it, determining which girl is Beverly and which is Shirley would be little more than guesswork; with it, it becomes clear that Shirley is the girl in blue, and Beverly the girl in red.

Finally, the Wikipedia "minimal extent of use" policy is met with the image in question. This policy does not ask for all images to be low-resolution. It is instead a catchall understanding that an image should be used in such a way as to minimize the risk of copyright infringement. When appropriate this would call for a lower-resolution image, but, in other circumstances, it can be met by other factors.

Minimal extent of use. An entire work is not used if a portion will suffice. Low- rather than high-resolution/fidelity/bit rate is used (especially where the original could be used for deliberate copyright infringement). This rule also applies to the copy in the File: namespace. (italics added)

Note that high resolution is not ipso facto verboten, but is considered least compelling only "where the original could be used for deliberate copyright infringement." Here, the source dust jacket is so damaged as to render any depiction of it, regardless of resolution, inappropriate "for deliberate copyright infringement." The three seams—left of the spine, right of the spine, and right of the cover—are each separated, in turn separating and distorting the parts of the illustration. The rightmost seam is so mashed up as to obscure what is actually depicted on the right side of the dust jacket; it looks like there is a door and steps to a building, but in no way is it clear. The dust jacket is furthermore chipped along both top and bottom, especially along the spine. Color is entirely missing in some spots, and in others score marks and scratches detract from the appearance. Tape is also evident throughout, discoloring and obscuring the illustration, while ensuring that the overall texture is distorted. "Minimal extent of use" is a subjective policy, and depends on the particular facts in each specific case. Resolution can be important; here, it is less so. The abundant flaws in the dust jacket make it hardly compelling for one looking to use it "for deliberate copyright infringement." Only in its higher-resolution form, however, are several details relevant to the narration of the story, and the commentary thereof, able to be perceived.Usernameunique (talk) 00:15, 29 April 2016 (UTC)