Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Feeding pigeons 1.jpg

File:Feeding pigeons 1.jpg, not featured

Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2009 at 03:34:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Feeding pigeons 1.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Feeding pigeons 1.jpg

•  Info created by Mbz1 - uploaded by Mbz1 - nominated by Mbz1 -- Mbz1 (talk) 03:34, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Info The exposure time of the image is 1/13 sec. It was done in purpose to blur the motion of the feeding and flying birds, and to show an atmosphere of the scene.
•  Comment This elderly lady told me before she left: "Pigeons need food, not pictures." It was interesting to see the birds flying around her, it was almost as they did not want to let her go, that they were afraid she might not come tomorrow.--Mbz1 (talk) 03:42, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Support -- Mbz1 (talk) 03:34, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Very confusing and busy composition. Is this the best we have on commons? Nothing special here. Lycaon (talk) 05:49, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Surprisingly it is quite attractive --Muhammad (talk) 06:54, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Same thought as Muhammad. →Diti the penguin — 07:29, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Support per Muhammad. Reminds me of Mary Poppins... Time3000 (talk) 09:30, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Support I like it so much. Jacopo Werther (talk) 09:58, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Interesting, but IMO there's something wrong with the colours. —kallerna™ 11:44, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

there's nothing wrong with the colors, normal colors of an early sunny morning. The only edit to the image was auto contrast.--Mbz1 (talk) 12:37, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

•  Oppose Artsy, but bad composition and crop. -- JovanCormac 13:13, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

The image was not cropped at the bottom. There were pigeons everywhere there, no matter how the image was taken, some would have been cropped anyway.--Mbz1 (talk) 13:47, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

•  Oppose i get the idea...but for me it is also a bit to busy. --AngMoKio (talk) 18:35, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah, AngMoKio, I am afraid you did not get the idea. What I am going to say next is the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the the truth. So here it is: When I am taking images of the people (not my usual subject) I am thinking: AngMoKio said that Commons has not enough people featured, when I am taking a long exposures shots (not my usual subject either) I am thinking: AngMoKio says he likes long exposure shots. So as I could see I am doing everything to please you, and after all my efforts oppose again --Mbz1 (talk) 18:52, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I didn't expect that my comments have such a big impact on your life. But all you said about me here is true....but this doesnt mean i support any people or long exposure shot. If you have a convincing pic I am happy to support as I did before. --AngMoKio (talk) 19:18, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Not on my life, it is an overstatement, only on some of my subjects --Mbz1 (talk) 19:25, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

•  Support this composition is much more interesting, than one below. Leaving figure is more touching, than standing one. Аrrangement of birds on this shot is better too. --Dmitry Rozhkov (talk) 12:58, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose These are very interesting pictures, but the overall technical quality IMO is not sufficient for FP. Also the colours don't really appeal to me. --NEUROtiker ^⇌ 14:24, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 15:59, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Result: 7 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Yann (talk) 09:34, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

alternative, featured

•  Support--Mbz1 (talk) 19:48, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Support I don't like the one above so much, but this one I really, really like. I'm glad you put this up as an alternative, I was going to suggest it! Maedin\^talk 08:58, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Yes, I like this one better. Yann (talk) 12:06, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Support as above --Muhammad (talk) 17:42, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose as above. Lycaon (talk) 07:15, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Jacopo Werther (talk) 09:41, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Very emotional and nice shot! --George Chernilevsky (talk) 09:57, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose  Neutral quite usual composition. The one above is much more interesting. --Dmitry Rozhkov (talk) 13:01, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose These are very interesting pictures, but the overall technical quality IMO is not sufficient for FP. Also the colours don't really appeal to me. --NEUROtiker ^⇌ 14:24, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

What quality is not sufficient for FP? You means the blured pigeons? --Mbz1 (talk) 14:38, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

No, the blurred/moving pigeons are what makes the pictures so nicely alive! What I mean is: especially in the upper picture the plants in the background are blurred an the small patch of sky is overexposed. In the lower picture some parts of the background look like they have been sharpened, but there are still blurry parts. This doesn't mean I don't think these are good pictures, they are just not perfect enough for FP IMO. --NEUROtiker ^⇌ 15:17, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. In this particular image one should keep in mind, that if some parts of the background seem to be blured, it only means that a pigeon flashed over it. This is a single image, and IMO it is not possible to have some parts of the background blured and otheres sharp.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:33, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

•  Support Tells a poignant story :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 00:23, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Result: 7 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral => featured. Yann (talk) 09:32, 29 September 2009 (UTC)