Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Stipiturus malachurus - Southwest National Park.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Stipiturus malachurus - Southwest National Park.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Feb 2014 at 20:52:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison - nominated by Citron -- Citron (talk) 20:52, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Support -- Citron (talk) 20:52, 18 February 2014 (UTC)- Support Excellent, nice composition and subject, excellent. For me this picture is Amazing (some distracting no importan problem like branch in wrong DoF. Could be nice in full size for a Canon EOS-1D Mark IV) --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 23:14, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, only 1280x; maybe he is hiding something...--Citron (talk) 10:28, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Oppose Small size, suboptimal quality (DOF, oversharpening) and disturbing shadows. B.p. 14:16, 19 February 2014 (UTC)- Support Beautiful framing, worth to be featured. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:47, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
- Support Good composition and framing. Worthy of becoming a featured picture. --DAJF (talk) 02:45, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose Technical problems such as sharpness. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:23, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
- Support It's a 500mm lens with 2x converter on a 1.3x crop camera. So 1300mm lens. I think that might explain the size. Our only other pictures of this bird are hundred-year-old drawings. -- Colin (talk) 17:18, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
- @Colin: Does a 2x cut the resolution also to half? I did some search (when the same question came a few weeks ago); but didn't find an answer. I think ISO 1,600 is another reason for the down-sampling. Jee 03:21, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
- I'm no expert. It won't reduce the sensor resolution but you can't double the focal length without some loss of sharpness (as it will magnify any defects in the lens plus add some of its own). The EXIF says "35 mm equivalent: 1108.1 mm" which isn't as much as I thought with that crop camera. Still, it is a huge focal length. I would like to know more from @JJ Harrison: about this shot and we don't know how much it was cropped (which reduces the MP by a square-law). What we know about this image it that it has no competition for this species on Commons. -- Colin (talk) 10:30, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose per Biopics. Probably a good candidate for VP, but not FP IMO. --Avenue (talk) 22:59, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 23:10, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
