Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Mosquero Cardenal, Vermilion Flycatcher, Pyrocephalus rubinus (17352440678).jpg

File:Mosquero Cardenal, Vermilion Flycatcher, Pyrocephalus rubinus (17352440678).jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2016 at 12:50:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Mosquero Cardenal, Vermilion Flycatcher, Pyrocephalus rubinus (17352440678).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Mosquero Cardenal, Vermilion Flycatcher, Pyrocephalus rubinus (17352440678).jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes
•  Info created by Amado Demesa - uploaded by Josve05a - nominated by Josve05a -- Josve05a (talk) 12:50, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
•  Support -- Josve05a (talk) 12:50, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
•  Neutral The bird only occupies a small space on the photo and seems not to be well focused, the contrast of light is very strong and has a lot of background noise. --The Photographer (talk) 13:01, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

•  Oppose - I, too, see no good compositional reason for all the empty space in this photo and will vote against the picture in this form. However, the bird itself looks good to me. If a good crop is done, I might support the result. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:20, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
  • May this be a good crop? (Lossless, same ratio) Josve05a (talk) 14:42, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

• Yes, I think so. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:05, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
•  Comment The crop is a better composition, and actually a very good one. Nice interplay between the color of the bird and the background. I do not think the BG should be further denoised. It will only lead to posterization. The photo seems a bit oversaturated though and the contrast and/or sharpness is set a bit too high IMO. The wow is there for me. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:53, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

• Me too. Josve05a, would it be legitimate for you to offer the cropped version as an alternative, or is the original photographer reachable to inquire about this? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:44, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
  • I have not spoken with the photographer on Flickr about this yet unfortunatly, but the user is out there if you'd like to contact them. And as for "offering the cropped version as an alternative", sure thing ;) Josve05a (talk) 22:46, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

• If you do, I will vote for it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:13, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

• However, I do not know how, if I "need to do something". Josve05a (talk) 23:14, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

• Since so far only the nominator has voted support for the original crop, the easiest thing would be for the nominator to withdraw this candidate (unless Josve05a thinks it still has a chance to get promoted), and then open up a new nomination with the crop instead. An alternative is possible in the same nomination, but it is difficult to setup correctly, closure needs to be done manually, and when you introduce an alternative, it usually does not get that much attention. -- Slaunger (talk) 06:30, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

•  I withdraw my nomination in favour of opening a new one for the copped version. Josve05a (talk) 11:58, 26 March 2016 (UTC)