Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2017.07.05.-14-NaturCampingplatz am Springsee-Storkow (Mark)--Kleiber-Maennchen.jpg

File:2017.07.05.-14-NaturCampingplatz am Springsee-Storkow (Mark)--Kleiber-Maennchen.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Apr 2019 at 14:38:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:2017.07.05.-14-NaturCampingplatz am Springsee-Storkow (Mark)--Kleiber-Maennchen.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2017.07.05.-14-NaturCampingplatz am Springsee-Storkow (Mark)--Kleiber-Maennchen.jpg

448

2152

296

448

2168

3047

some problem here

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Sittidae (Nuthatches)
•  Info All by me. -- Hockei (talk) 14:38, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- Hockei (talk) 14:38, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose.  Comment I find the image is not pleasing to look at, the lacking separation of the bird from the tree means that it's harder to see what the bird is doing; a different angle to the tree would have been better. On the technical side: the resolution is a bit low as this seems to be a deep crop (6 MP from 20 MP) and overall sharpness isn't up to to the best wildlife FP we have. On the bird, the structures of the feathers are not as detailed as I would like them to be, most likely motion blur from the 1/80 s exposure time on 400 mm focal length was a bit too much. – Lucas 17:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

•  Comment I have no idea what you are talking about. The resolution definitely is big enough. Du you think you can stand in front of it in maybe 2 m distance while the bird is in hasty movements? Do you think it would waiting for you until you got your picture? For this hasty movements also the sharpness is right. So you can see the motion and it is clearly visible what it was doing. In my monitor you can see everything. Maybe that's your problem? How ever, I'll say nothing more to your statement. There is no point in discussing it. --Hockei (talk) 18:53, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

•  Comment I'm worried I was too harsh, I striked my oppose, I'll wait for other's opinions and mull it over. – Lucas 19:53, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
• I'm surprised at the 1/80 sec too and I can see why the white area might be off-putting, Lucas. Charles (talk) 22:08, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

•  Support Ok, I may know ziltch, zero, nada about bird photography but after some thinking I'm supporting this. We always get the same pretty "bird on a twig" here, but this guy is getting down and dirty with something in the bark and he is contorted with the effort. I have tried to find another photo (on Commons and online) where this behavior that is so typical for these birds, can be seen as clearly as here. So far nothing, most photos are of sittas sitting perky on their way down a tree. I'd call this a photo of a working bird; it's all legs claws and beak to get the food and survive. I like that. Size and detail are good enough for FP IMO. --Cart (talk) 20:02, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support Per Cart. Wasn't sure about this one but I think the fact that it's a bit more dynamic than the usual bird photo outweighs the slight question marks over quality. Cmao20 (talk) 20:30, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose The light here is unfortunately quite dull and partly there is some sharpness missing. Even though the bird might be shown in a special situation it is no FP for me.--Ermell (talk) 20:43, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Comment The bottom half of the bird is not very easy on the eye. I've also marked a problem area. Charles (talk) 22:06, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

•  Comment @Charlesjsharp: Looks like he applied sharpening and CA removal to the photo, but at that specific area the nuthatch moved, hence the motion blur; the computer tried to compensate for the false-positive of the motion blur, and combined with the sharpening, that effect was produced. ― Gerifalte _Del Sabana 03:42, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

• @Charlesjsharp: , please add notes to the nomination page, not the file page. -- Colin (talk) 12:10, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

•  Support Behavioural shots are rarer and harder to get a clean image. Possibly behaviour works best in video, but we should still attempt to get good stills. -- Colin (talk) 12:10, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Info New version. I tried to reduce the issue as far as possible. --Hockei (talk) 17:31, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 00:42, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Ermell. I agree with Cart that the image is different from our other bird pics, but it has too many technical shortcomings for that to overcome. Daniel Case (talk) 00:52, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Daniel and Ermell and my comment above. I would love to support a bird photo with more action like this, but the technical quality is sadly not good enough. – Lucas 07:21, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per above. --BoothSift 06:00, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per above --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:56, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose per above. -- Karelj (talk) 09:52, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 23:43, 11 April 2019 (UTC)