Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Walking the water buffalo.jpg

File:Walking the water buffalo.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2014 at 07:30:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Walking the water buffalo.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Walking the water buffalo.jpg

•  Support -- Quoc-Phong NGUYEN (talk) 07:30, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
•  Support Looks good. Quite a change from the usual nom. Yann (talk) 08:10, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose Crop at the left & top way too tight --A.Savin 10:35, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
•  Support very nice. Tomer T (talk) 17:31, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
•  Support Lovely --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 17:49, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
•  Neutral Per Yann. Exotic enough for a "western eye" as mine, and very charming. But I think some parts are too noisy (the face, the hair of the girl), the motion blur is a pity (hand), and the hat is overexposed in clear parts. Unauthorized portrait of a child. Not far from the star, but I remain neutral here. IMHO.--Jebulon (talk) 15:53, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
•  Support--ℳ₪Zaplotnik^contribs 13:10, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
• weak  Oppose Really a nice picture and heartwarming smile on her face, but the technical drawbacks keep me from supporting, considering the image size of just 6 Mpix. Motion blur in the girl’s right arm/hand, denoising/sharpening artifacts in her face. (Motion blur of the animal’s foot does not distract me since that is supposed to move.) Crop is a bit too tight. 1/125 s is quite a long exposuring time for moving objects. At a fully open aperture of f/5.3, you obviously got to the limit of what this lens is capable of ;-) Imagine what kind of pic a prime 150 mm lens at f/2.8 would have made of this situation. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 06:14, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Jee 16:05, 11 July 2014 (UTC)