Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Nankeen kestrel midflight.jpg

Nankeen kestrel in midflight

 * Reason:Good shot of a difficult target - lighting is pretty good considering I'm looking up at it. These kestrels are so frustrating because unlike most other birds they don't fly off at full speed when they see you, instead they gracefully glide away higher and higher and you keep thinking that maybe he'll come back ;)
 * Articles this image appears in:Nankeen Kestrel
 * Creator:Fir0002


 * Support as nominator --Fir0002 11:15, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose Very nice composition and I know it must have been a difficult shot but I find the bird unsharp. --Muhammad (talk) 20:30, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the sharpness is quite acceptable, particularly given it's pretty much a 1:1 crop off the original. For instance it doesn't seem any worse than this fairly recent bird FP, and certainly no worse then some of the 1:1 crops you've had featured recently (eg File:Darkling beetle.jpg, File:Homoneura_sp_wb2.jpg)... --Fir0002 03:32, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose - pretty much what Muhammad said. Definitely a good shot, but slightly short of FP for me, in quality. I do appreciate the difficulty though - if you want a laugh, here's my best bird shot. Stevage 03:17, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Support The sharpness seems fine to me - slightly noisy perhaps, but not beyond the bounds of acceptability at what must have been a short shutter speed. Time3000 (talk) 08:53, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Support. I don't know about the sharpness criticism - it does appear soft but I think that is due to the lighting from above coming through the tips of feathers.  Anyway, I think it meets all the criteria and is a nice image.  |→ Spaully τ 09:24, 24 June 2009 (GMT)
 * Weak support It's good, particularly in illustrating the wings. Good job recovering the shadows and a tough shot, so lack of fine detail is kind of forgivable. Borderline support. --mikaultalk 12:13, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Support Noodle snacks (talk) 05:50, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * weak support A wee bit grainy, but still a dynamic and illustrative shot. I can only assume you were balancing a small rodent from your forehead for this. Do we have a barnstar that covers exposing your eyes to attacks from diving raptors? Matt Deres (talk) 00:33, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose Lacks necessary detail for strong EV. Makeemlighter (talk) 02:21, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Per above comment. - Damërung  ...ÏìíÏ..._ Ξ_         .   --  14:53, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for not closing this sooner; I've been busy. Because it stayed open for a couple more days, it got two more opposes. While I respect these !votes, I have to say it's my fault that they're there. I don't discount them, but based on the other votes, difficulty, timing, and (let's face it) shear luck of this wonderful image, I am promoting it. EV is high as it's a bird of prey soaring, legs pulled in, and looking straight at the camera; one is hard-pressed to get something this good again at reasonable quality. Issues? My talk → -- wade ster 16   18:54, 2 July 2009 (UTC)