Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Trupial on a cactus.png

File:Trupial on a cactus.png, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jul 2014 at 19:58:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Trupial on a cactus.png Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Trupial on a cactus.png

•  Info created by Atsme - uploaded by Atsme - nominated by Atsme -- Atsme☯^Consult 19:58, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Support -- Atsme☯^Consult 19:58, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Comment I suggest you convert it to JPEG (lossless compression non necessary here) and try to provide a 2mpix version of it if you can. I remember about a 2mpix size minima over here - Benh (talk) 22:31, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Neutral Peer Benh. Downsize to hide noise and jpg artifacts is a bad practice. Please, revert and I will support --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 23:29, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Ok, thank you. Atsme☯^Consult 03:25, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

•  Comment The original upload was a 38.8 mp MB .png file which was unacceptable. I tried to upload a smaller version as a jpeg at 2.2 mp MB, but the uploader insisted on same name/format as the original which is why it's still a .png file, only smaller. Atsme☯^Consult 00:10, 26 June 2014 (UTC) Atsme☯^Consult 03:25, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • I did not speak to reverse version, I was talking to reverse downsizing --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 00:32, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
    • It's a 6mpix file and you can convert it to jpeg and keep it < 2mb without downscaling and without apparent loss (blurry area tend to compress well in Jpeg). I did it but don't want to overwrite your contrast and color tweaks. On a more review side, it's a quite striking image, but maybe not on par with the very finest FP birds Commons has (competition is hard on that category!) because of the quality. And the background might be too distracting.- Benh (talk) 04:58, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Support --Kikos (talk) 04:17, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per BenH. It seems that the uploader does not know the difference between MPix and MB. Png for pictures is not a good solution. -- -donald- (talk) 08:21, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Actually I do know the difference. My fingers on the keyboard refused to cooperate with my brain. Apologies for the mistake. I just did a strikethrough, and corrected it. Atsme☯^Consult 03:25, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
    • Ok, but there is still the rule of 2 MPix. -- -donald- (talk) 06:29, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
      • Fixing that issue now. TY. Atsme☯^Consult 15:49, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
        •  Support Pic now larger. -- -donald- (talk) 08:03, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Comment What are the yellow and white borders around its feathers? See File:Curacao-Icterus-Icterus-2013.JPG and File:Venezuelan Troupial - Icterus icterus.jpg for comparison. Jee 12:14, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Maybe inner camera software filter added a litle oversharpening, I think so. --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 15:11, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

•  Oppose I'm not sure about the differences .png and .jpg. My oppose is with regards to the sharpening halos. --Graphium 15:57, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
•  Comment It's backlight transparency caused by fringed ends of the white and yellow feathers. Look at the white fringing around the wing feathers against the bird's body, and the tail feathers contrasting with the darker silhouette of the bird. It is most noticeable on the white edge of the tail feathers. The image wasn't sharpened - it was shot RAW, and tweaked for contrast and color only. Sharpening would make it grainy, not create a halo. The images referenced above don't show any white around the tail feathers - could be the birds aren't marked exactly the same. The lighting was certainly different. This bird had quite a bit of white fringe around its feathers, even through its neck. I guess if the reviewers don't like trupials with white fringed feathers, the image won't be selected. Not much more I can add. Atsme☯^Consult 21:19, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 12:45, 5 July 2014 (UTC)