Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Nictitating Membrane

Nictitating membrane
Voting period ends on 1 Apr 2011 at 11:08:15 (UTC)
 * Reason:I guess this isn't the typical FPC. Although it's not very large, it meets the size requirements, and I think it's extremely encyclopedic and illustrative of a fleeting and small subject in the wild. (I'm a contributor at Commons-FP, and saw the talk page request for more participation here, so here I am!)
 * Articles in which this image appears:Nictitating membrane, Bird vision, Bird, Blink, Masked Lapwing
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
 * Creator:99of9


 * Support as nominator --99of9 (talk) 11:08, 23 March 2011 (UTC) (to be clear, I now prefer edit 1) --99of9 (talk) 23:37, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. Final frame is noticeably blurry. Would it be possible to sharpen it or replace it with a less blurry frame? Kaldari (talk) 17:46, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I'll have a go. There is only one alternative capture, and the head had a slightly different tilt, so that one will require perspective correction.  This one could be digitally sharpened of course.  99of9 (talk) 00:59, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I think edit 1 improves this (and a couple of other things I noticed). 99of9 (talk) 01:01, 25 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Support A picture of a bird yea, but not JAFP of a bird! Really cool, we need more pictures like this. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 21:42, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Support edit 1. This is a very valuable sequence; the timing is impressive, and the result is a world of difference from the other images in commons:Category:Nictitating membrane.  Obviously cropping this tightly results in a considerable sacrifice of resolution and there may be other tiny (but understandable) technical issues, but on balance those things are outweighed. Chick Bowen 02:24, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Support but if you removed the reflection from the third, why not remove it from the first also? Nergaal (talk) 06:34, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Good point. Mainly because I didn't notice it. Done. --99of9 (talk) 06:59, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Could use a few more comments on the edit. Makeemlighter (talk) 21:55, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Support Clearly. Thanks for nom'ing here.  upstate NYer  12:44, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Support, prefer edit 1. Excellent EV. --Avenue (talk) 13:01, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Support. Very good. J Milburn (talk) 19:06, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Support I prefer the original (as it is at Nictitating membrane) it seems livelier: both the skin and reflection of sun in eye.TehGrauniad (talk) 11:08, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Support edit 1 only. Glare is undesirable.  Jujutacular  talk 14:14, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Support I prefer the original as the edit makes the rich yellow look washed out, however the glare is not acceptable. I wonder if the glare could be removed with the rich colours retained. – SMasters (talk) 01:10, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment The third frame of the original had a redder hue than the other two frames. I presume this is what you mean by "rich yellow".  I diminished the magenta component in that frame, so that it was equal to that of the other frames.  In this case I think consistency is the most important factor. --99of9 (talk) 02:04, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Nudge At the moment it stands at 4:2 in favour of the edit (amongst those who've made their preference explicit). 99of9 (talk) 06:08, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 23:00, 18 April 2011 (UTC)