Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Le Grand Heron.jpg

Image:Le Grand Heron.jpg, featured

•  Info created & uploaded by Acarpentier - nominated by --Richard Bartz 19:03, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Info The Great Blue Heron, Ardea herodias, is a wading bird in the heron family Ardeidae
•  Question Ok I think I will merge these and update the image with the original background version since there is no opposition on Fir0002 point of view. If there is a problem, I'll revert theses changes. Acarpentier 14:44, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Good one <3 --Richard Bartz 19:03, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support until the selective colour filter issue is resolved. It has been resolved Lycaon 14:53, 30 October 2007 (UTC) Lycaon 19:14, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support I like it. Good details. --JuliusR 19:49, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support. Pour le regard du poisson, qui est probablement son dernier. Thierry Caro 21:48, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Effectivement, je ressentais la peur dans les yeux du poisson, hé hé hé ;) Acarpentier 19:04, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

•  Support Nice picture. Calibas 05:26, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Neutral A cropped version of This one would be more interesting by several magnitudes and actually starts to hint at the size and beauty of this bird which while in flight covers (as in blocks from view) a significant area of the sky (compared to other birds). --carol 05:33, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Also, forgive me if I have encroached upon a voter block here; it is fun how little groups of people always support each other, isn't it?! Doesn't everyone have fun with this? -- carol 05:36, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I also like the heron 4 version showing wing... you are right about the cropping, I’ll do as you proposed. ;)Acarpentier 19:08, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

•  Support A very good capture. A crop of the other one would, unfortunately, be too small for promotion as an FP. --MichaelMaggs 06:16, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Joli ! moved below Benh 07:09, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --Beyond silence 08:32, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --Digitaldreamer 18:57, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose Hopefully everyone above is aware of the selective background desaturation that has been applied to this image? Anyway I personally think it really ruins an otherwise terrific image --Fir0002 www 06:22, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• How can you tell, Peter? Lycaon 07:17, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• Isn't it obvious? When have you seen a seen where you get vivid yellow beak and eyes and virtually monochrome background? Including autumn colored leave? Including green growth near the river? Check out another one of the shots by Acarpentier, Image:Female Mallard Duck.jpg - anything strike you as odd with that? The only colour is on the bird? But that aside there's some pretty obvious clues, namely the colour halo around the heron's legs. See Image:Le Grand Heron temp.jpg. Honestly I've said it before but I'll say it again - you commons folk need to become a little more careful when examining photos.... --Fir0002 www 22:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• And I've said it before and I'll say it again - you need to learn how to make a point without being condescending. Most people will just see the negative tone and disregard the point altogether. Not to mention it makes you look kinda silly. --JaGa 06:59, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• This beaviour will change when growing a bit... ;) Acarpentier 01:41, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

• Let us hope not - I value the ability to evaluate images... --Fir0002 www 09:13, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

• An interesting perspective on this - if anything I would expect it would leave a lot of the above voters looking pretty silly that they didn't notice something which is pretty obvious. I think it would do voters well to take notice of this, because I've only decided to comment here in hopes of getting a better version of a pic I really liked; dare I suggest that if I hadn't comment this would never have been noticed? Dare I suggest that numerous images with manipulation which have gone unobserved by voters here? And if people are just letting there egos get in the way of proper voting well that's just another failing of com:fpc IMO. --Fir0002 www 09:13, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

• I think that you are wrongly presuming that people didnt notice it and that's where you're bit too fast on conclusion... Even on QI process people remarked it, and it pass the test anyways. You should just step down a bit and relax, think twice before acting like that and insult people... ;) Acarpentier 14:11, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

• OK if any of the above supporters (prior to my comment) can honestly say that they knew that the image had been selectively desaturated and still supported without comment I'll gladly apologise. But I seriously doubt anyone did.... --Fir0002 www 22:27, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

•  Question Is there some sort of Australian kids vs. Richard Bartz war going on? Well, anyways, I for one don't know what selective background desaturation is or why it's bad. Could you enlighten me? --JaGa 07:02, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• ??? It's not even taken by Richard Bartz! Selective background desaturating is where you either use a sponge tool to desaturate or as I suspect was the case in this image, duplicate layers and desaturate the bottom layer to about 70% and then erase through. This is bad because it presents reality in a way which is impossible (leaves and that will never by near monochrome whilst the bird is full colour, and I personally find it very bad aesthetically. --Fir0002 www 22:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
• I prefer using adjustement layer in photoshop than to duplicate a layer. In that way you keep the image layer clean and original. I also found very usefull the photo filter tab to fight against bad lightning, and cost less money than buying real filter. Anyway I found it better like that and think that the background where distracting. Take a look, do you like it better? ;) Acarpentier 23:02, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

•  Oppose Image too dark. Dori - Talk 23:43, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Now this is very nice! Yzmo 07:23, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose see original. Lycaon 10:50, 28 October 2007 (UTC) see above (this gets complicated:-)). Lycaon 14:54, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
• Conditional  Support As long as the background remains saturated :) Benh 22:29, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

If you prefer this one

* Info - If you prefer without the vignetting. ;) Acarpentier 23:37, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

•  InfoSince there is no opposition on Fir0002 point of view about the deasaturation background, I've deceided to replace it with the original background version. So you can replace your support or oppose from this alternate version to the previous one since it's the same now. Thanks, ;) Acarpentier 23:37, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose I actually do like this one better, but still the image is too dark. Dori - Talk 23:43, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Much better version. Much better - I'd love to see your mallard duck without the desat as well! Possibly a downsample/sharpen should be applied to improve image quality at full res --Fir0002 www 09:13, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support per Fir. Lycaon 10:50, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Agree with Fir0002. I haven't noticed the desaturation applied to the bg (but the colours weren't that shocking to me, not as much as on the picture of the duck) -- Benh 16:58, 28 October 2007 (UTC).
•  Support This picture shows why the bird is colored they way it is. I thought the original looked strange. Same image as above. Calibas 23:29, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

result: 10 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral => featured. -- Lycaon 17:36, 2 November 2007 (UTC)