Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Pied kingfisher female

Pied kingfisher female
Voting period ends on 8 Feb 2018  at 22:56:51 (UTC)
 * Reason:High quality image illustrating article well. FP on Commons
 * Articles in which this image appears:Pied kingfisher
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
 * Creator:Charlesjsharp


 * Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:56, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Support You might try to remove noise with focal bracketing (in future). --PetarM (talk) 14:29, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Not sure what you mean by focal bracketing here. This is a a hand-held shot from an unstable floating platform. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:45, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Its not stacking as i do often. It's focal bracketing, if you have it on camera. Means you push button at (say) f/6.3 so it goes f/6.3,f/7.1,f/8 straight (if you put 3 shots, i have 5 also, so is increasing that number). They you set Median stack, getting rid of some noise, while you set the bird on best f. It is some working, but the shot is a keeper. You might move, the background is far from being sharp anyway, erase tool can help (3 shots - 3 layers in a stack). EVen if you are afraid which f would be good, you can still choose just one. Better than putting manual. --PetarM (talk) 16:53, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Camera does not have that F no. facility but does have night-scene-hand-held which combines 4 images, but too much sharpness is lost with these approaches (such as AEB Automatic Exposure Bracketing) when protographing the hairs and feathers on wildlife. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:25, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * An idea: You might simply shoot a burst of 3 to 5 images (most cameras have burst mode), then edit/average out the grain in the background, but keep the best frame of the bird... The slight grain doesn't bother me, so Support. In fact, the spider thread bothers me more... ;-) --Janke | Talk 13:57, 1 February 2018 (UTC)


 * I'd support a bit tighter crop. Too much of the right side is empty space. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:59, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. The lead room on the right is not a problem. dllu (t,c) 05:06, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * There is no consensus on how much space to leave. See my current FP nomination on Commons where The Photographer argues exactly the opposite to Chris's suggestion!: []. As long as there is enough space in an uploaded version I think the argument on a portrait is not so important. More important on a landscape-type image. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:29, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * @Dllu: I simply said I'd support a tighter crop. Maybe 150px on the top, 200px on the right, or something like that. I understand the point of lead room. However, given that the subject is static, and the EV of the image is related to its appearance within articles (at thumbnail size), I think that a slightly closer crop would work best on en-Wiki. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:43, 1 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment – Agree with Chris re tighter crop, especially since background lacks visual information. Sca (talk) 14:36, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Very happy if someone marks up a suggested crop. I'd then crop the image of the male to suit. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:26, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I marked one idea. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:04, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ Sca: cropped version as suggested by Chris uploaded. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:33, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * And if you are croping, than do left side also so tree would start from diagonal. And bird will become a bit biger also. --PetarM (talk) 09:55, 2 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Support - Would also support Petar's idea. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:53, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ another crop. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:08, 2 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Support per my !vote on Commons. Daniel Case (talk) 02:43, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

--Armbrust The Homunculus 00:16, 9 February 2018 (UTC)