Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2016 Singapur, Jurong Bird Park (175).jpg

File:2016 Singapur, Jurong Bird Park (175).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Apr 2017 at 14:57:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:2016 Singapur, Jurong Bird Park (175).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2016 Singapur, Jurong Bird Park (175).jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
•  Info all by me Halavar -- Halavar (talk) 14:57, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- Halavar (talk) 14:57, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose The head is nice, but not the composition and the background. Charles (talk) 15:02, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
•  Neutral I like the composition (I can see how the bird head look like a tree and contrasting with the trees in background, Excellent!), however, it's oversharpening resulting in noise absolutely fixable. --The Photographer 17:20, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

I applied a noise reduction, however, I rollbacked myself, if it's ok for you you could take this version and set on top. We need another opinion too if you accept this version --The Photographer 17:39, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

 Info Thanks for the new fixed version. It's better:) --Halavar (talk) 22:03, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

•  Support yes, the background is unfortunate, but head and expression are truly interesting --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:01, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 21:43, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment - I really like the bird, and especially its head feathers, but might you consider cropping out a little more than half the background to the left? I'm finding those leaves distracting and unhelpful to the composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:26, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

  If I cut the half, composition would be worse than now. --Halavar (talk) 07:24, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

•  Support I think, it is OK the way it is. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 16:14, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Charles. Daniel Case (talk) 18:58, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose - I've been sitting on this for a while, but I'm forced to agree with Charles. The background, composition, and lighting just scream "bird in a zoo", which, while not inherently bad, tends to make for somewhat artificial looking wildlife images. Sorry. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:41, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per Charles - composition and background. --Karelj (talk) 16:00, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 21:04, 13 April 2017 (UTC)