Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Marabou stork (Leptoptilos crumenifer) head.jpg

File:Marabou stork (Leptoptilos crumenifer) head.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2017 at 09:59:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Marabou stork (Leptoptilos crumenifer) head.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Marabou stork (Leptoptilos crumenifer) head.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
•  Info "I remember the days when I used to do my hair every morning in front of the mirror, just the way Ethel liked it." All by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 09:59, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- Charles (talk) 09:59, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support You applied a noise reduction in background dividing in layers the bird and the background for apply a gaussian blur in the background, however, in the low layer (a copy of the front layer) there is the bird that now is showed like a dropshadow in the current image. My suggestion is apply a simply noise reduction in the background but not dividing in layers. BTW it's a amazing image --The Photographer 10:16, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

• I can't see the shadow you describe. Can you highlight it please. I didn't use layers (nor gaussian blur) in the NR process. Charles (talk) 12:17, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

I added a note, it is in around all the bird, however, where it is more visible is over the beak --The Photographer 12:25, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

New version uploaded, but I think you'll find it was/is an optical illusion :) Charles (talk) 12:46, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

:P I don't think so, take a look to the "note more clear" that I added, there is more visible the dropshadow --The Photographer 13:02, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

No. This VERY faint shadow is a result of reducing highlights of the white feather in RAW. Charles (talk) 14:29, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

• Is this background real, i suppose i could see some more at this EXIF. I would lift bird more up (+bottom px) and try to solve back. --Mile (talk) 13:59, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

• Yes, taken against brown wall. Charles (talk) 14:25, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

I added another note more clear (Between white feathers and the background), please take a look and let me know if this dropshadow could be fixed --The Photographer 16:17, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

•  Support good enough as it is, imo --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:23, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support for a feature of this weird-looking head and beak. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:20, 10 January 2017 (UTC)talk]]) 16:20, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Golden Bosnian Lily (r) 18:07, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --XRay ^talk 19:29, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment I am not entirely convinced about the composition. For me it would have worked better if the beak more directly pointed towards the lower left corner of the image. As it is now, the crop seems a bit too tight from below and with a bit too much space on the left hand side. Otherwise very good. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:07, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

• I can guarantee if I was to crop the left, many editors will say (with some justification) that it is cropped too tight. I like where the eye is - rule of thirds on both axes... Charles (talk) 23:04, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

• Charles: That is actually a very good point! -- Slaunger (talk) 17:30, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

•  Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:43, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:44, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- Thennicke (talk) 06:26, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Jee 06:35, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support I think I see what The Photographer is pointing out ... but it's really, really subtle. Daniel Case (talk) 06:51, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support lNeverCry 21:15, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment I believe what The Photographer is calling "drop shadow" effect is really local contrast, likely caused by the "Clarity" slider in PS. Visible but I won't go as far as call it obnoxious. Could be fixed with developing the raw again with a neutral clarity slider, cutting/masking around the bird and using the non-clarity parts as background. KennyOMG (talk) 16:37, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

• I've never actually used the clarity slider, but, as I said, I did 'reduce highlights' of the white feathers in RAW and that has produced a very faint halo - it is much more marked if you process a JPG this way. Charles (talk) 17:18, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

• Oh I missed that part, but it's pretty much the same thing (adjusts local contrast and creates halos). Fix is also the same, even simpler (develop without highlight prot and mask the protected feathers on that image). I haven't said it yet but quite the pic otherwise! KennyOMG (talk) 04:40, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

•  Support I'm often not as drawn into nature photography personally, though this image is a clear exception. Great picture. WClarke (talk) 03:51, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:45, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
•  Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:46, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

I think you made two votes here by mistake, Jacek Halicki. I have striked the second one. -- Slaunger (talk) 12:49, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

You're right, this is a mistake. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 13:10, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /lNeverCry 17:18, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds