Wikimedia Commons

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Cheetah at Sunset.jpg

< Commons:Featured picture candidates

File:Cheetah at Sunset.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2014 at 07:30:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  •   Info All by me-- Arturo de Frias Marques (talk) 07:30, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support -- Arturo de Frias Marques (talk) 07:30, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose Truly stunning, but given the marginal resolution, it should be razor-sharp at full resolution, which it really is not. I think the softness is because you have hit the diffraction limit with an aperture of f/17. Would have been better with a larger aperture, ISO 100, and a shorter shutter time. Sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 09:43, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    •   Neutral Changed my mind after considering the creators reasonable comments on my talk page regarding my original assessment and the conditions of the shot. The timing and atmosphere of the shot mitigates to some extend the not so impressing technical quality and the "thumbnail" resolution. -- Slaunger (talk) 13:54, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think it worth quoting what Arturo wrote on Slaunger's talk page (which is a reminder imo of the usefulness of saying something when nominating: "By definition, a picture of a wild predator after sunset has important technical challenges, mainly the almost inexistent light, and the fact that a cheetah on the prowl will stay on top of the termite mound for a second, not even two. You are lucky if you see it, compose and fire. There is no time to change settings. Honestly, I think this image is unbelievably atmospheric, one of the most powerful in my portfolio - you can almost hear the crickets, smell the savannah, feel the determination of the hunter. And as such, I expected it to be evaluated on its artistic strength, the story it tells, the feelings it conveys, not by the sharpness you would expect in an arquitectural image." I agree that it is one thing to expect a careful consideration of shutter/aperture/iso for an architectural image, but when capturing a fleeting and magical moment like this, one never gets a second chance and fiddling with one's camera may just lose everything. In terms of the "'thumbnail' resolution", Slaunger mentions, I think there are mitigating factors for wildlife photography. The image was taken at an effective (fully-frame equivalent) focal length of 200mm with a 10-year-old camera. The image resolution is about half the sensor resolution. I don't know if this image is cropped, but heavy cropping is more likely in a wildlife photo than one taken in other circumstances. -- Colin (talk) 20:24, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support Basik07 (talk) 20:14, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support A silhouette is more about recognisable shape than fine detail. Sure, one can find flaws, but it is a great moment captured from just the right angle of view. -- Colin (talk) 20:24, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment Thank you Slaunger for changing your mind, and thank you Colin for your comments. I have uploaded a full-res file, at 4000px, instead of 1920px as before. I think this will improve resolution but some border softness remains as the light was really almost inexistent when the cheetah showed up. The image is very slightly cropped, perhaps only 5% or so. --Arturo de Frias Marques (talk)
  • Strong   Support What a great picture! Very nice! --mathias K 07:10, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 09:36, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support Great, though a bit soft due to the circumstances --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:34, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support per Colin --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:29, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --El Grafo (talk) 14:51, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support Wow! --· Favalli ⟡ 00:35, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support This is a great one! The settings are though pretty awkward for a telephoto shoot (f/17?) Poco2 11:44, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment Thanks everybody for recent support votes... To Poco, you are of course right, the settings were very awkward indeed... and not on purpose. I think I have never been shooting in the bush at F17... you rarely need more than F10 with wildlife subjects (except macro, or closeups of animals with very long snouts...), and you rarely have enough light for that at dusk... This cheetah took me completely by surprise, I was driving back to camp, almost at night already, when I saw it on the mound. I could only stop the car, grab the camera and shoot. I had probably changed the aperture by accident when leaving the camera on the seat....
  •   Support I think sharpness can be ignored in a case like this. Excellent shot. --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 20:04, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 06:24, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --Kadellar (talk) 12:52, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 03:01, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Cheetah_at_Sunset.jpg&oldid=134890221"