Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Graugans Anser Anser.jpg

File:Graugans Anser Anser.jpg, not featured

Voting period ends on 20 Aug 2009 at 23:29:12

•  Info created by H005 - uploaded by H005 - nominated by H005 -- H005 (talk) 23:29, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Support -- H005 (talk) 23:29, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
• And this is supposed to have "wow"? --Dschwen (talk) 23:46, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

  To me, it has. But for this is a matter of personal taste, it's hardly arguable. -- H005 (talk) 23:50, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

  Which makes it sort of a crappy criterion for FPs... Anyhow, it is a nice shot, good use of DOF. --Dschwen (talk) 00:09, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

  Holds lots of wow for me, based on subject matter. It's not just about great photography [which I think this is], the subject, EV etc, should also be taken into consideration, going by the guidelines above. This important fact is often getting lost here on times, and is becoming to look more like a photography competition each time I look. I really like what I find here on commons, based on value, not quality and technical merit all the time. Julielangford (talk) 00:30, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

•  Support gorgeous shot. Lovely detail and crisp. Julielangford (talk) 00:06, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --ianaré (talk) 05:56, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose The composition is too centered, some noise in backgroung and foreground, no wow. The head is not very sharp in my opinion. By the way I got an impression that the image was retouched. Was it?--Two+two=4 (talk) 10:23, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
  • The head as center of attention follows the rule of thirds. --Dschwen (talk) 14:31, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Depends on what you define as "retouched", I think I added some light in post-processing, not much though, and maybe also a bit of contrast, I don't recall it entirely, I definitely didn't remove any objects or applied manipulations only to certain parts of the image or those kind of things, if that is what you mean. So really only minor "darkroom" operations that go without saying on almost any picture nominated here.
    

As for the centering, as Dschwen says, the head is not centered, and moreover I don't think that rule of thirds should be applied to everything in a "no questions asked" manner, if there's nothing else on the image but the object and a single homogenous background I believe it would make it worse. Imagine the duck centered to where now the head is, I do not think that would be an improvement. -- H005 (talk) 16:42, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Just to clarify, I was not at all implying the RoT should be applied without switching your brain on ;-). --Dschwen (talk) 20:35, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

No worries, I've not even been inclined to think you were. :-) -- H005 (talk) 21:41, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Maedin\talk 12:53, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Alternative, featured

•  Info - Denoised -- Pro2 (talk) 12:08, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Support -- Pro2 (talk) 12:08, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Julielangford (talk) 12:42, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Question H005, was the image background and/or foreground retouched manually except denoising?--Two+two=4 (talk) 16:14, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

  No, see above. -- H005 (talk) 16:42, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. The alternative looks better. --Two+two=4 (talk) 17:11, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

•  Support I agree, I didn't recognise noise as an issue when nominating the image. -- H005 (talk) 17:28, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Donarreiskoffer (talk) 07:04, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Support -- Albertus teolog (talk) 19:00, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Boring composition and scene otherwise I like the colors   • Richard • [®] • 20:56, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Support One man's boring composition is another's relaxing study. Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 00:34, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Support --Brackenheim (talk) 19:01, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
•  Support /Daniel78 (talk) 10:53, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

 Question As everyone agrees that the edit is better, shouldn't we upload it as a new version of the original image rather than keeping two separate images? -- H005 (talk) 17:10, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

 Info As no one opposed I have done so and will request deletion of the now duplicate File:Graugans Anser Anser new.jpg. -- H005 (talk) 20:43, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Maedin\talk 12:53, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

The voting period for this candidate is over, but the FPCBot is leaving this for manual investigation due to use of multiple images. Closing this candidate needs to be done using the manual instructions.

/FPCBot (talk) 19:09, 21 August 2009 (UTC)