Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Daurian redstart at Daisen Park in Osaka, January 2016.jpg

File:Daurian redstart at Daisen Park in Osaka, January 2016.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jan 2016 at 12:56:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes
Info created/uploaded/nominated by Laitche (talk) 12:56, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Laitche (talk) 12:56, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:21, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:54, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Hubertl 16:38, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support-- Pierre André (talk) 17:31, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 18:26, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support WOW! --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:42, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice work. --Pine^✉ 18:57, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support great job! — 0x010C ^~talk~ 19:07, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely. Just lovely. Daniel Case (talk) 20:21, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 21:27, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Very pretty bird, and it's amazing to see an oversized image of it full up my screen in full size. I'd like the picture a little better if the highlights in the bokeh were darkened a bit, though, and since no attempt is being made at realism in the background, I don't see a drawback to doing that. I just think it would make the photo easier and more pleasant to look at. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:39, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I struggle to see you keep making the same comment on practically every wildlife photo Ikan. Surely you must understand the way that depth of field works in a camera? Charles (talk) 16:50, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment What's the issue here? If the background is blurry, where's the issue in editing it to look more pleasant and less distracting? But in any case, I am a viewer. As I mentioned in another thread, the technical challenges of taking a photo are not my issue; I care only about the finished project. In the same way, I could tell you how hard it is for me to play some notes in tune in a particular dynamic level, but why should you, as a listener, care? Perhaps if you like how I performed, you might find it interesting to ask me how I did it, but otherwise, it's irrelevant to you, isn't it? [Edited to add: Anyway, your characterization is incorrect: This is not the same comment I make all the time. In my supporting vote for the picture of the gull, I praised the bokeh as merely a gray background, and I didn't complain in this case that the bokeh made me dizzy, which happens sometimes in other pictures, nor did I complain about any lack of clarity in the resolution of the bird itself, as opposed to my remarks about the picture of the Persian cat. I just get that feeling that you don't like any kind of comment about bokeh or even partial blurring of the subject that either isn't 100% supportive or doesn't take issues of photographic technique that are irrelevant to me as a viewer into account. But on the whole I am skeptical of bokeh, because I consider it a misrepresentation of what we see in real life, and I feel like if photos don't present things more accurately than paintings, what is their advantage as an art? I mean, yes, I can understand the concept behind a producing super-clear photo of one thing and sacrificing the rest of the picture to more or less unrecognizable blur, but I don't have to prefer it to at least relatively clear representation in the entire photograph.] -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:24, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow, you're putting a lot of pressure on me :-) Excellent shot! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:13, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Frank, yeah we have a bit of pressure and also a fun! --Laitche (talk) 03:22, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:02, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:20, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support Pile on. --Yann (talk) 16:25, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support A feast for the eyes. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 17:29, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support quality shot. Charles (talk) 16:50, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pofka (talk) 17:31, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 22:07, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 13:24, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:26, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:24, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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