Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:European Brown Bear.jpg

File:European Brown Bear.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2014 at 18:14:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info European Brown Bear, Ursus arctos arctos, at Whipsnade Zoo. Created, uploaded and nominated by me, -- Baresi F (talk) 18:14, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Baresi F (talk) 18:14, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support It is a great zoo shot in the sense that it is not at all evident that it has been taken in a zoo. Good pose and high quality. Nice texture of the fur. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:27, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 08:20, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Good shot. Alphama (talk) 12:22, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice! Great expression and posture -- Arturo de Frias Marques (talk)
Oppose Lots of strange artefacts on the coat. Overcategorization (fixed). --A.Savin 13:25, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above, certainly a bit oversharpened -- Christian Ferrer ^Talk 17:44, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:31, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Artifacts all over the fur caused by JPEG compression (overall sharpness is fine) --Kreuz schnabel 05:16, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I see no lack. Very good shot. -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 06:59, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Info Thanks for the comments and taking time to review. The speckles that can be seen at 100% are due to some noise introduced by the ISO setting of 400 - which I used because the bear wouldn't keep still :-). It's always a balancing act when trying to preserve detail in fur and feathers at higher ISOs, and of course a matter of taste. This image is at the native resolution of the sensor, just cropped to square, with the subject filling most of the frame. As such, I would have some latitude to reduce the appearance of speckles by downsampling (and still leaving it well above the FP minimum size req); alternatively, I could try some NR to clean it up. In this case, however, I'd rather leave as-is, as IMO I don't think it detracts much from the image. --Baresi F (talk) 11:41, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support. Artefacts are unfortunate but given that they're not too prominent I think it's OK. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:18, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yann (talk) 13:41, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Basik07 (talk) 19:45, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 07:49, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support PointsofNoReturn (talk) 14:33, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--DXR (talk) 10:53, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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