Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Tree swallow in JBWR (24712).jpg

File:Tree swallow in JBWR (24712).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 May 2021 at 08:24:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Tree swallow in JBWR (24712).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Tree swallow in JBWR (24712).jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Hirundinidae (Swallows)
•  Info created & uploaded by Rhododendrites - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 08:24, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
•  Support -- Tomer T (talk) 08:24, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose Nowhere near FP quality, as I suspect Rhododendrites will confirm. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:59, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Well I probably wouldn't put it that way :P ... but it's not one I was considering for FPC. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  12:36, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
• @Tomer T: Thanks for the nomination! I uploaded several photos of tree swallows sticking their heads out of nest boxes recently. The two I was toying with nominating were this one and this one. I don't know if they would pass, but I think one of them is probably worth a shot. The first has a similar shallow DoF to this nomination, but I prefer the angle, direction the bird is facing, and background. The second has a DoF that covers the subject, but a strong shadow (which I don't mind because it accentuates the face and the overall "angry bird" look :) ). — Rhododendrites ^talk |  12:36, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per above --RolfHill (talk) 18:12, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 03:11, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
•  Question What's so bad about this photo? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:07, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

•  Support good question... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:47, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• Composition with shallow DoF, shadows on bird, unappealing white background. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:00, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
• Very good example of minimalist bird photo, something we don't see very often on this forum. Clear lines and shapes with color blocks in subdued tints. --Cart (talk) 11:54, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• I guess my question would be whether those who like this image prefer it to File:Tree swallow in a nest box in JBWR (24519).jpg (which was my most likely nomination of the bunch), File:Tree swallow in a nest box in JBWR (25673).jpg, or even the similar File:Tree swallow in JBWR (24707).jpg (looking towards the camera rather than very slightly away)? Obviously promoting this one would all but preclude nominating any of the others, which is the reason I haven't supported here. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  15:53, 21 May 2021 (UTC) @Ikan Kekek, Martin Falbisoner, and W.carter: — Rhododendrites ^talk |  15:54, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, the 'ping' didn't work for some reason, so I just noticed this. To me, from an artistic POV, this nom is the best and it has 'wow factor'. The (24519) is the best encyclopedic photo. --Cart (talk) 09:40, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment I do like File:Tree swallow in a nest box in JBWR (25673).jpg best. To be clear, I haven't voted for this nomination; I was just surprised it was described as "Nowhere near FP quality", a statement two other people already signed onto, and I appreciate Charles' enumerations of the shortcomings of this photo. I think we should try to mention some when it might not be blindingly obvious to others that the photo in question is so obviously not worth consideration here, but this remark isn't intended as a criticism of anyone. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:06, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• Noted, I should have been more explicit, my comment wasn't helpful, but I do think it is blindingly obvious! Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:45, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• To me it's not blindingly obvious as I do like the artistic choice made here. That being said, 24707 is even better. But I'd also support any of the other candidates --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• @Martin Falbisoner: , @Ikan Kekek: , @W.carter: , @Rhododendrites: , you commented but didn't vote. If you want this picture to have a chance, there are few days left for the vote. Tomer T (talk) 07:46, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• I did vote (i.e. I supported the nom) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:57, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
• Sorry Tomer T, per this I don't vote on nominations anymore since I can't trust my damaged eyes any longer. It's difficult to decide were to draw the line, so it's better not to do it. This is a particularly challenging image for me with such a large portion of light areas. To my eyes, the whole right side and half the bird is white so I have to download the image and use the color sampler to "read" the colors. --Cart (talk) 08:11, 25 May 2021 (UTC)'

• I assure you, I'm well aware that I haven't voted. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:32, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

•  Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 07:22, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Different in a refreshing way (cf. Cart’s comment). --Aristeas (talk) 10:17, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per others, low quality. -- Karelj (talk) 20:23, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

  That's not true, @Karelj: . --A.Savin 21:20, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

•  Support I'll go with cart on this. If this doesn't pass (it seems like quite a longshot at this point), maybe I'll give the one I mentioned above a shot afterwards. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  13:03, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
•  Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:25, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
•  Support --ToprakM ^✉ 23:42, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:15, 29 May 2021 (UTC)