Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Amurtiger-Zoo-Muenster.jpg

File:Amurtiger-Zoo-Muenster.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2013 at 12:56:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Tuxyso - uploaded by Tuxyso - nominated by Tuxyso -- Tuxyso (talk) 12:56, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 12:56, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- VolodymyrF 19:45, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Suid-Afrikaanse (talk) 23:06, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SocCarpassion (talk) 13:20, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose nice photo but to dark background imo for FP (especially the dark tree behind the animal's head).--ArildV (talk) 13:46, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Info My intention was to bring out the main subject (the tiger) well. Might be correctable, but I like it that way. The dark area behind the head is (for me) a nice dark (not black) natural background for the tiger's head. If only photos where every area is sharp and every area has the same brightness can become FP, every photo has to be a HDR focus stack :) A common style in photography is light-dark-contrast. --Tuxyso (talk) 13:54, 28 December 2012 (UTC) [reply]
  - Your comment is a bit unfair (or rather the assumption behind your comment). I work with shadows, various DOF and contrast when I shoot and I have never demanded what only photos where every area is sharp and every area has the same brightness can become FP. It would be madness to do so. You can have a look at the pictures I have nominated and voted for here. This particular image has imo a dark and disturbing background, it may be deliberately or not but it does not work for me here. Regards --ArildV (talk) 14:10, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - My argument was poignantly formulated and not against your photography. If it was misunderstanding sorry for that. It was a bit polemic against the trend on FP, especially on QI that every area of a photo has to be sharp and uniformly bright. I still think that my dark background to the tiger's head is not disturbing but accentuating the main subject. --Tuxyso (talk) 14:24, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      - I try to avoid getting into irritated discussions on Commons (as the discussion you link to) but I personally think it is simplistic to talk about a trend. For example, "foreground is too dominant to be out of focus" is a valid argument and dosnt mean that "shallow depth of field is always wrong".--ArildV (talk) 14:38, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 15:52, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Neutral~~ Support I like the composition and expression of the tiger, but to me the left side of the tiger is not really well exposed due to the position of the sun. I'd support if you can fix that Poco a poco (talk) 10:00, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Done I've slightly corrected your issue. I've not noticed it on a high res A3 print, you have good eyes :) Support, if possible. Thanks! --Tuxyso (talk) 18:11, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - It got actually better, thanks Poco a poco (talk) 19:27, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful! Michael Barera (talk) 23:06, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:49, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Kürbis (✔) 18:24, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice expression, good background, looks almost like it was taken in the wild. --A.Savin 21:17, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Tamba52 (talk) 21:25, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Exquisite --Spartan7W (talk) 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 21:14, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Béria Lima ^msg 17:53, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals