Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Pitón de la India (Python molurus), Zoo de Ciudad Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam, 2013-08-14, DD 08.JPG

File:Pitón de la India (Python molurus), Zoo de Ciudad Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam, 2013-08-14, DD 08.JPG, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Feb 2014 at 22:39:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Pitón de la India (Python molurus), Zoo de Ciudad Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam, 2013-08-14, DD 08.JPG Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Pitón de la India (Python molurus), Zoo de Ciudad Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam, 2013-08-14, DD 08.JPG

•  Info Head of a specimen of a captive 3 meter long albino Indian python (Python molurus) in zoo of Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. All by me, Poco² 22:39, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
•  Support -- Poco² 22:39, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
•  Support -- Excellent detail, lighting and colors. --Gourami Watcher (talk) 23:39, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
•  Support Michael Barera (talk) 01:06, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose I am very sorry if I am wrong, however, IMHO the eye appears to be a photographic retouching taken from another animal because that does not match the depth of field and focus of the rest of the head of the snake. --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 02:16, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

• Not only eye; the nearby parts are also in focus. Quite common results from full frame bodies. (I hate to support such works though.) Jee 06:49, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

• Wilfredo, I have to say that I am offended and disappointed with your comment. I don't retouch or fake my pictures in the fashion you did with the bull in your FPC below. I have never done something like that and will never do without stating it clearly and for a good reason. Do you think I'd retouch all 12 pictures in this category?. If you actually oppose because you believe it is a fake, it would be fair to ask first and vote depending on my response. Poco² 08:59, 26 January 2014 (UTC)~

 Comment Hi Poco, my comment is not about you, about the category or about another fp nomination of mine. If you are my friend or not is irelevance in a FPC. I invite you to see my comment objectively, my comment was educate, I wrote I am very sorry if I am wrong and IMHO, then, please dont try to not deviate this nomination to irrelevant feelings that do not help to improve the picture. btw, in this moment the snake eyes look like is not part of the picture, maybe you make some overprocess in the eye area and now it look fake. I invite you to compare the snake eyes in this picture extrated from this category with your picture. Thanks --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 11:16, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Ok, agree, my comment was not adequate. I appologize. I have uploaded a new version addressing some oversharpening issues, improving the bokeh and removing some spots. Please, let me know what you think. Poco² 12:12, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

 Support No te preocupes. He estado viendo la primera version que subiste en la que no se ve el problema de oversharpening que genera un ruido no solo en el ojo sino tambien en otras zonas de la serpiente. Sin embargo, la ultima version tiene mucho mejor balance de blancos. Es algo que te he comentado con anterioridad, es un ruido particular que poseen algunas de tus fotos creado por el oversharpening luego de un denoising podria ser. Pienso que podria ser corregido si dejaras el ajuste de color que hiciste pA todas estas, por supuesto, es solo mi humilde opinion. Un abrazo --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 12:44, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

•  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:59, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
•  Support ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 13:11, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
•  Support --JLPC (talk) 23:08, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose Too big snake for a so small DoF (too much part of the image is unsharp) Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:26, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
•  Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 05:58, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose shallow dof and the denoised area border around the snake is visible. --Ivar (talk) 19:11, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

   New version I fixed the uneven denoising areas, indeed it is looking better now Poco² 21:51, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

•  Support Yann (talk) 12:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose Very pixellated, and unsharp. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 07:21, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose Unfortunately, AK's right. Plus a visible borderline between noisy snake and denoised background. --A.Savin 10:12, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Can you please add a note?. There were some issues that I addressed following Ivar's comment. Now, I don't see where else this problem is visible and it would be great to address the issues before the nomination is closed, mainly because they are correctible. Poco² 11:32, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
    •  CommentLast version is a bit better, but noisy/denoised borderline is still visible around the snake. --Ivar (talk) 13:19, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
      • Ok, I saw what you talked about easily zooming 2:1. I have uploaded a  new version Poco² 19:36, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 06:10, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

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