Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Two Phalacrocorax auritus and one fish.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Image:Two Phalacrocorax auritus and one fish.jpg - not featured[edit]

Two Phalacrocorax auritus and one fish

  •  Info created , uploaded and nominated by Mbz1 -- Mbz1 23:49, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Mbz1 23:49, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Anon. user: This picture really "captures the moment" if you know what I'm talking about. If that bird was flying fast, my camera couldn't have done it. :)
  •  Comment If you are interested what happened to the fish, it was able to escape right after that shot. That's why, Lycaon, I am afraid I was not able to id the fish :-) --Mbz1 23:49, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • When I nominated the image last night, I hoped that in the morning I would get at least 4-5 oppose votes, and I got only one question! Doing great so far :-) , but jokes aside I know the image has many problems to be opposed for. I nominated it because IMO it is more or less rare action shot and I hoped some of the image's problems might have been mitigated by that fact. Here's is the original version :. Maybe somebody could do something to improve the image quality. Thank you.--Mbz1 13:26, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 in a favor of a much better edit 

Withdrawn >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 08:46, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Two Phalacrocorax auritus and one fish edit.jpg. Edit by User:Lycaon - not featured[edit]

Two Phalacrocorax auritus and one fish

Oh, it is easy to explain. First I divided the image with two imaginary horizontal and two vertical lines. Then I placed my subjects of interest (two Phalacrocorax auritus and one fish) in one of the "interest points", where horizontal and vertical lines intersect and 4 interest points were created. Then I placed horizons in the upper horizontal line. My main idea here was not to center the subjects. While I was doing all these manipulations, one of my subjects (the fish) almost got eaten while two of my other subjects run out of the "interest points" and almost out of my view finder. I wanted to recompose the image once again, but the fish escaped and birds were gone. :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mbz1 (talk • contribs) 00:29, 7. Mai 2008 (UTC)
You definitively have to work on your animal tamer skills. --norro 11:51, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • You are absolutely right and I will try next time, only I doubt there would be a next time. IMO it is rather a rare shot and I hoped it might be featured under the criteria " A bad picture of a very difficult subject is a better picture than a good picture of an ordinary subject. ", and I had not just one, but three difficult subjects. Thank you, Norro.--Mbz1 14:03, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
don't forget the last part of the sentence "A good picture of a difficult subject is an extraordinary photograph." I think featured pictures should't simply be good pictures, they should be some of the best images on commons .. thus extraordinary. -- Gorgo 23:01, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That is a personnal (mis)unterstanding of the sentence.--B.navez 02:19, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
IMO most of the FP images we have now including my own FP images cannot be called extraordinary. Informative - yes, valuable - yes, high quality - yes, extraordinary - no.(IMO)--Mbz1 04:00, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, Lycaon was first to mention it, I hadn't read the discussions for the first version. --B.navez 16:49, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose A very dynamic picture and the subject is interesting, but the exposure time is not high enough for details, the second edit seems oversharpend and together with the cropped wing, it's not FP quality. --Taraxacum 14:07, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    "A bad picture of a very difficult subject is a better picture than a good picture of an ordinary subject. " from Commons selection criteria. The nominated edit by User:Lycaon is really good. Honestly, when I saw it, I could not believe that I myself took this image :-)--Mbz1 04:00, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree, the edit improves it a lot, but better is not excellent, yet. Nevertheless a good shot. --Taraxacum 06:39, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Both birds were unfortunately at wrong angle. --Lerdsuwa 18:22, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wish I knew what would have been a better angle in the user opinion. You know, just to ask the birds next time to pose better for FP, but no I'm not really interested in learning the user opinion about the angle. Tha's OK. No worries.

 boring!--Mbz1 18:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply] 

Withdrawn >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 22:29, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Image:Two_Phalacrocorax_auritus_and_one_fish.jpg&oldid=11535395"