Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Oryx gazella male 8054.jpg

File:Oryx gazella male 8054.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2014 at 11:26:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Oryx gazella male 8054.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Oryx gazella male 8054.jpg

•  Info created, uploaded, nominated by me: -- Alchemist-hp (talk) 11:26, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
•  Support -- Alchemist-hp (talk) 11:26, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
•  Comment Cool walk; but don't happy with the wagging tail (?) Jee 16:31, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

  "don't happy with the wagging tail" --> but this is typical for that animals: he scares the mosquitoes! Take a look to the water surface too and you can see a lot of insects. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 17:34, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

   Support After a rethought. Yes; it adds some coolness to his walk! Jee 17:46, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

•  Support --Baresi F (talk) 20:36, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
•  Support Yann (talk) 06:07, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
•  Support although the legs are noisy, since it is inevitable in this situation. --Graphium 08:55, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose Sorry but I've been thinking about this nomination for while and I can't support. At the end of the day, it is a decent telephoto zoom picture of an animal in profile. Not bad at all, decent sharpness and DOF! But no wow imo. The strong colors in the background is distracting (despite perfect DOF), the composition is not exciting.--ArildV (talk) 18:46, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

• I've noticed this. But IMHO, this (busy bg) is the price we have to give if we need "more fine details" with a medium tele than a picture like this with 500mm F4. Jee 16:41, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

•  Oppose -- No need to invoke minor technical flaws. What lacks in this picture, to be outstandig and become a FP, is a special touch. Alvesgaspar (talk) 14:35, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per Avelgaspar --Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:22, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose -- A lower perspective would have added some drama I suspect. As it is the animal doesn't stand out well. Saffron Blaze (talk) 20:55, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose The background is too sharp. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:05, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

  ... but a "typical" view of animals on safaris in the Etosha National Park at water holes :-)

  "The background is too sharp.": the DOF of the animal will be more unsharp with a less then f/8. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:25, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

  The animal has quite sufficient DOF. I'm pretty sure it'll look fine at f/5.6 or perhaps even f/4. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:26, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

•  Oppose -- nice photograph, but I feel the light and animal appearance should be better for FP. -- ~y (talk) 18:19, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
•  I withdraw my nomination Thanks for all votings and bye bye ... Alchemist-hp (talk) 19:02, 20 May 2014 (UTC)