Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Athene cunicularia 01.jpg

File:Athene cunicularia 01.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Jun 2012 at 06:37:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 06:37, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Even birds are sometimes a bit tired. --Llez (talk) 06:37, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 06:37, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice. DimiTalen 14:12, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Light was not ideal. I think it would benefit from some local exposure adjustments on the darker feathers. --Paolo Costa (talk) 14:27, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Info Some corrections done --Llez (talk) 15:35, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Better --Paolo Costa (talk) 15:53, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 17:24, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Telemaque MySon (talk) 18:35, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Joydeep (talk) 18:52, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose see nothing Special Zivya (talk) 19:03, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
weak support and I see a nice image. The compositon can be a bit less centered. On the right a bit less, on the left a bit more place. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 00:32, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I wondered with the Exif (55mm at f/5.6); very rare to me in bird photography. Could you explain why this choice? Jkadavoor (talk) 06:45, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I checked per random several FP of birds and found a range of f/4 to f/9 and a focal length of 55 - 600. So the values are at the lower border, but not exceptional. The distance to the bird was lesser than 2 m, the light not very good (see exposure time 1/60 with f/5,6). The small distance explains the focal length of 55mm, the bad light f/5,6. A smaller aperture would have caused 1) a exposition time too long for a living object 2) probably a more detailed, distracting background (for the distance to the wall behind was only about 1m), a larger aperture would have caused too little DOF of the object itself. --Llez (talk) 14:25, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Support Thanks for the info. Jkadavoor (talk) 05:02, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- MJJR (talk) 21:33, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 15:27, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cephas (talk) 20:21, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Brackenheim (talk) 19:06, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:38, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:22, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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