Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:TF Wildpark Johannismuehle 03-14 img11.jpg
File:TF Wildpark Johannismuehle 03-14 img11.jpg, not featured
editVoting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2014 at 07:45:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Info all by A.Savin
- Support --A.Savin 07:45, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
- Support Great, but maybe a portrait crop would be even better. --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:13, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
- Support --XRay talk 08:27, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose Too much in shadow and want a more detailed image from a captive bird at FP. -- Colin (talk) 13:34, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose Notable chromatic noise under the wings and on the breast. Not sharp enough, sorry. No offense Colin, but I don't see why it should be more detailed because captive: anyway, the bird is as mobile as in the nature, no ? It is not a stuffed specimen...--Jebulon (talk) 15:13, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
- Not less sharp than some of building photographs getting promoted here (and also supported by you sometimes); yes, quite mobile birdy which does not stand still for more than some seconds; and - yes, some noise but certainly not chromatic (=colour) one. --A.Savin 19:09, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
- Don't be angry ! I know what "chromatic" means, I learnt ancient greek when I was young, and the word is the same in French. So, there is chromatic noise, as I said. And I find the bird, especialy the face, not sharp enough, sorry. And yes, I've probably made mistakes in my votes. Didn't you ?--Jebulon (talk) 21:26, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
- Actually, I think A.Savin is right, there is noise but it's not chromatic. Chromatic noise would be a mixture of red, blue and green blotches. There's very little of that in the image. It's just luminance noise. Diliff (talk) 12:47, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
- Don't be angry ! I know what "chromatic" means, I learnt ancient greek when I was young, and the word is the same in French. So, there is chromatic noise, as I said. And I find the bird, especialy the face, not sharp enough, sorry. And yes, I've probably made mistakes in my votes. Didn't you ?--Jebulon (talk) 21:26, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
- I don't buy the "we have promoted images that are worse than this" argument you've raised here and in another photo. That some weak images get through isn't an reason to promote another weak image. If that argument held, we'd be on a downward spiral towards mediocrity. Perhaps we are :-(. I'd be very surprised if any 10MP unsharp building image got promoted these days. Comparing building and animal photography is pretty silly anyway. Jebulon, a captive bird can be trained to land and stay quite close to people. So it it would be possible to get as close as one desired and the keeper/circumstances allow. With a wild bird, one would be happy to even get the bird to fill the frame of a huge zoom lens. We have lots of highly-detailed head-portraits of captive birds of prey, for example. -- Colin (talk) 21:35, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
- Not less sharp than some of building photographs getting promoted here (and also supported by you sometimes); yes, quite mobile birdy which does not stand still for more than some seconds; and - yes, some noise but certainly not chromatic (=colour) one. --A.Savin 19:09, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
- Support Excellent composition, nice moment, nice pose. Well done --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 23:08, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose IMHO not sharp enough for a bird FP. The level of detail is relatively poor - even at the sharper areas. Also f/5 at 130mm could be a problem - the claws a very unsharp. Light is not really good, the background is bumpy. --Tuxyso (talk) 05:23, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
- Support --JLPC (talk) 08:20, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose I just don't see this as one of our finest works, particularly in the bird category. Saffron Blaze (talk) 16:31, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
- Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:19, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
- Support --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 02:44, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose per others, sorry. --Kadellar (talk) 21:00, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 09:45, 27 April 2014 (UTC)