Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Macropus rufogriseus with joey in pouch.jpg

File:Macropus rufogriseus with joey in pouch.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Jan 2019 at 05:56:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Macropus rufogriseus with joey in pouch.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Macropus rufogriseus with joey in pouch.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
•  Info all by Grendelkhan -- grendel|khan 05:56, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- grendel|khan 05:56, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
•  Comment - I think I prefer File:Macropus rufogriseus with joey in pouch grazing.jpg, though I don't guarantee I'd vote to feature it. This is a large photo for a wildlife photo, but it's not that sharp. The other one is sharper, and it also has more generous crops, which I think is good. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:21, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
•  Support – Lucas 16:32, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 07:41, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
•  Weak oppose I can see why you wanted to take it, but it just doesn't quite come together enough for FP for me. Daniel Case (talk) 17:32, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
•  Support Pleasing flow of composition from upper left to lower right, well lit, neutral background, not too posed but also not so candid as to obscure details She animates (talk) 18:38, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

• Invalid vote. The guidelines state "Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote.". This account has been created yesterday and this is the first edit -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:20, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

•  Oppose The composition is nice, but the quality is not. The depth of field is really too shallow. With this light, much more details could have been captured with a smaller aperture. Even at the focus point the best parts of the animal are not sharp. The light is harsh, acceptable but not particularly appealing, especially at the bottom where the contrasts are very strong. Valuable image but not among our finest, because overall it's too blurry -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:35, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Basile and my remarks above. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:08, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:09, 31 January 2019 (UTC)