Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Przewalski's colt (head).jpg

File:Przewalski's colt (head).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jun 2010 at 22:44:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Przewalski's colt (head).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Przewalski's colt (head).jpg

•  Info created by Michael Gäbler - uploaded by Michael Gäbler - nominated by Michael Gäbler -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 22:44, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Support -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 22:44, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Straight-on view is not very good for a FP. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 23:00, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Question Why ?--Jebulon (talk) 23:19, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
  • I doesn't really show the full animal. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 23:24, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Thanks for answering. Thats surely why you opposed to this and this...Sometimes FPC project is hard to understand for newbies...--Jebulon (talk) 09:02, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
    • Cats have a much broader face. A cat picture from the front still tells you a lot. However, a horse's head is long and narrow, so best shown from the side. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 20:37, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose -- Poor angle, face distorted, too tight crop. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:06, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Info High Fin Sperm Whale and Alvesgaspar, this file and the File:GunnarSønsteby.jpg are both portrait photographs. A portrait photograph points at the individualistic personality. This is the legitimacy of the necessary portrait photography. The portrait photography is an old genre of the photography and is also ok in the Featured Pictures. I think, it is wrong to say a portrait photograph has a poor angle and a too tight crop. I see in each animal an own personality, therefore I make also portrait photographs from animals. There are also portrait photographs from animals in the Featured Pictures like this. Alvesgaspar, you write: "face distorted". I used the lens Nikon AF-S Micro Nikkor 60 mm 2,8G ED. This high-quality macro- and portrait-lens (90 mm on my D300) makes no distortion. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 14:09, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
  •  Comment - I'm not talking about artificial ditortion caused by optics but the geometric distortion consisting of closer objects look larger than distant objects. In this case, and due to the relatively short distance, the whole head seems too big relative to the rest of the body and the muzzle looks too large relative to the whole head. That is why a longer focal distance is usually a better choice for portraits. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:26, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose this is a high-quality shot which I think is really not distorted. A 60mm lens is a good portrait lens. The composition is straight-forward and not bad...but for FP it is imho not outstanding enough. In this case a totally centred head might have a been a better choice, bcs then you get a symmetry (sth like this). Here are some animal portraits I like - this, this and also that Btw: The Emu portrait you linked also wouldn't have gotten (correct grammar?!) my support. Sorry.--AngMoKio (talk) 21:42, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

• Thank you AngMoKio. I nominate your crop in Alt 1. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:47, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

•  Oppose – Nice, but not featured. --Steindy (talk) 10:15, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Info Please see the Alt 1 with the crop made by AngMoKio. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 21:47, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:51, 2 June 2010 (UTC)