Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Swallow flying drinking.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Swallow flying drinking.jpg, featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jan 2013 at 14:17:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created by sanchezn - uploaded by sanchezn - nominated by sanchezn -- sanchezn (talk) 14:17, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Support -- sanchezn (talk) 14:52, 4 January 2013 (UTC)- Support Chapeau! Poco a poco (talk) 15:09, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support Ю. Данилевский (talk) 15:48, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support—Kelvinsong (talk) 17:34, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support WOW --Moonik (talk) 17:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support This is magic --Telemaque MySon (talk) 18:19, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support Very special --Uberprutser (talk) 18:34, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support Ça faisait longtemps ! --Citron (talk) 18:52, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support Indeed ! --Dey.sandip (talk) 18:56, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 21:21, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support --Suid-Afrikaanse (talk) 22:34, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support --Ivar (talk) 07:39, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Oppose Wow, but hardly any detail on bird and noisy. --Muhammad (talk) 10:34, 5 January 2013 (UTC)- Support --Schnobby (talk) 11:42, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 12:03, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose Not exactly the drinking moment is caught, the bird is only about to drink on the fly. Nevertheless interesting shot but technical quality is insufficient. -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 15:29, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Neutral: Kop van vogel niet erg scherp.--Famberhorst (talk) 19:01, 5 January 2013 (UTC)- Oppose Pics of birds in flight deserve a bonus, yes... but the technical quality is, nevertheless, not sufficient for "the very best of Commons" in this case. See Muhammad, sorry. Really wow otherwise. --A.Savin 19:58, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose despite great wow, due to bad technical quality. --Julian H. (talk/files) 20:46, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support Well done ! --Jeanot (talk) 21:29, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support Incredible capture! Michael Barera (talk) 03:02, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support Everything is said to the (slight) techincal shortcomings of the shot. Nonetheless an incredible and rare shot which deserves FP. --Tuxyso (talk) 16:39, 9 January 2013 (UTC) (UTC)
- It's a decent shot, but with the right equipment it's not actually that hard to do, and definitely not "an incredible and rare shot". See a few examples on my site shot with the 5D III - I have ~ 200 perfectly sharp photos of swallows in flight now that I have the Mk III... --Fir0002 www 00:23, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
- I'm not sure "right equipment" is the right way to put it. I'd say a 7D is better equipment than the 5DIII for birds, due to the 1.5x extension provided by the crop factor (i.e. higher pixel density). Sure, there's going to be more noise, but pixels are key when zooming in. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:42, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
- That may be true but the AF system on the Mk III is vastly superior which is the critical element to getting photos of swallows in flight. But regardless, what I'm saying is that with either the Mk III or the 7D or with any of several other bodies, the AF system is such that capturing a shot like this isn't a freak or extraordinary event... --Fir0002 www 07:50, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
- What? Af System? I don't know for the Mk III but my 7D AF is far too slow. I shot swallows in manual focus! Maybe swallows in your country are lazy and fly slowly! --sanchezn (talk) 11:58, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
- That may be true but the AF system on the Mk III is vastly superior which is the critical element to getting photos of swallows in flight. But regardless, what I'm saying is that with either the Mk III or the 7D or with any of several other bodies, the AF system is such that capturing a shot like this isn't a freak or extraordinary event... --Fir0002 www 07:50, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
- I've lots of respect for you and your great photos. What makes that picture is "incredible and rare", is the point of view perfectly in front of the swallow and the picture is taken at the water level. I didn't saw a picture of you or someone else like that. Of course my picture is not the sharpest (I printed it on an A4 and it's sharp enough IMO), but actually, I think it's probably the best picture of a flying swallow on commons. sanchezn (talk) 08:55, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
- Oh don't get me wrong, I think you should be proud of the shot - as you say, out it's well executed and taken from a nice angle (FWIW I don't think the sharpness is much of an issue - the reason I'm not supporting is I'm not terribly keen on the unnatural swimming pool background). As I mentioned above, I was just trying to highlight that capturing something like this isn't as rare as one might first think :) --Fir0002 www 07:50, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
- I'm not sure "right equipment" is the right way to put it. I'd say a 7D is better equipment than the 5DIII for birds, due to the 1.5x extension provided by the crop factor (i.e. higher pixel density). Sure, there's going to be more noise, but pixels are key when zooming in. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:42, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
- It's a decent shot, but with the right equipment it's not actually that hard to do, and definitely not "an incredible and rare shot". See a few examples on my site shot with the 5D III - I have ~ 200 perfectly sharp photos of swallows in flight now that I have the Mk III... --Fir0002 www 00:23, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support -- After considerable thought. Yes, image quality is far from good but there are two strong mitigating reasons: the incredible catch and the marvelous composition. Bravo! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:47, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
- Support Maire (talk) 21:18, 10 January 2013 (UTC) What a capture!
Confirmed results:
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds
