Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Catoptrophorus semipalmatus edit.jpg

Catoptrophorus semipalmatus

 * Reason:A very encyclopedic, good quality and beautiful photo.
 * Articles this image appears in:Willet
 * Creator:Mdf
 * Nominator: Pharaoh Hound   (talk)


 * Support original &mdash; Pharaoh Hound   (talk)  21:32, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Support either any, with preference for original or edit 2. Clear shot, simple background, and good lighting despite the apparently overcast weather. -- Tewy  21:44, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment You might want to crop the picture so that the bird is centered.-- ¿  Why  1  9  9  1  ESP. | Sign Here 22:01, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Personally, I don't think that's necessary. To me, the picture doesn't feel unbalanced. However, I have provided a cropped version for those interested. -- Pharaoh Hound  (talk)  22:12, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I strongly oppose a cropped version as the first one is very unique and the bird is still the focal point. &mdash; Arjun  22:39, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Support original per nom. --KFP (talk | contribs) 22:21, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Support isn't this image up for Quality image at commons? I was the one that voted to promote :D. And I see no reason why it shouldn't be featured. Amazing. &mdash; Arjun  22:38, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, now it is up for FPC on the Commons (thanks for the suggestion, not to mention the promotion on QIC). -- Pharaoh Hound  (talk)  13:53, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Support edit 1 Now the picture looks excellent!!!-- ¿  Why  1  9  9  1  ESP. | Sign Here 02:08, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Support edit 1 brighter and I like the cropping better Reywas92 TalkSign Here 02:15, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Support either version, with a slight leaning towards the original. Flawless image. « amiИa . skyшalkeя (¿Hábleme?)  03:14, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Support Cropped version is much better. --  William Pembroke  (talk) 06:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Support original I like the composition, and prefer the lighting on the original. Lovely picture. Mak (talk)  06:36, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Part of the reason I prefer the photo un-cropped is that it's more clear what the background is; a line of surf. When it's cropped like that, the fuzziness of the background actually distracts me a little bit from the subject, and it's not clear what the context is. I think it's lovely to see this bird on a cast-over beach, not only is it very encyclopedic, the original picture is very evocative for me. Mak (talk)  20:40, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Support for Edit 1; the focus is there, the size is there, the quality is there, the lighting is there. Excellent work! -- Alt  iris   Exeunt  06:58, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Support, with preference for edit 1. &mdash;Dgiest c 07:44, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Both Both are incredible photos. FP worthy, indeed.  S h a r k f a c e  2 1 7  08:17, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Support both. I like the cropping, but I prefer the lighting of the original. - Mgm|(talk) 11:18, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Support either. —sd31415   (sign here)  15:04, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Support either. Maybe a cropped version without a change in the lighting?  Michaelas10   (Talk)   19:30, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * My new edit 3 should be what you're looking for. -- Pharaoh Hound  (talk)  20:31, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Support either edit Wow, great picture! | A ndonic O  Talk 21:52, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Support original per nomination Mahahahaneapneap 22:49, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Support both. —dima/s-ko/ 20:23, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Edit ` Quite nice, and I may be going blind ,and please tell me if I am, but I can't tell the difference really between edit 1 and edit 2. Cat-five - talk 10:58, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It's an extremely subtle difference (it even takes me a second to figure out which is which, and I made them!). -- Pharaoh Hound  (talk)  15:11, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * If you can, try opening them in different tabs or windows, and switch back and forth. Any change is a lot more obvious that way. -- Tewy  19:58, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Raven4x4x 07:06, 8 January 2007 (UTC)