Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Black Rhinoceros

Black Rhinoceros

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 May 2011 at 03:52:46 (UTC)

Reason: High quality, well composed image giving a pretty complete view of the species. Used in a prominent capacity (taxo box). While some may want the feet to be shown, it's important to remember that no one mows the Savannah.
Articles in which this image appears: Black rhinoceros, Rhinoceros, Ngorongoro Crater
FP category for this image: Animals>Mammals
Creator: Ikiwaner

Support as nominator --Cowtowner (talk) 03:52, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good quality, EV and Well isolated from background. --Muhammad(talk) 05:50, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support Love it! Perfect (but still interesting) composition, love the shallow focus, great res, etc etc etc... Aaadddaaammm (talk) 06:34, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral A really good shot of a subject living in the outdoors, but I don't think it's perfect. I agree the composition is nice, and the quality is good. But I don't like the hard shadows and the hooves are missing, so I don't think the EV is humongous. The image seems also a bit ccw tilted. --ka ʁs tn 11:21, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Compared to the other photos in the article (except the zoo one), it compares very well in the "how much of the animal is visible" stakes. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 14:23, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Take a peek at our FP gallery of large African mammals and you'll see that a number of them have their feet obscured. It's the reality of the environment. You'll probably see the same thing with hard sunlight. Cowtowner (talk) 15:25, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit1 added - tilt corrected version (note: I also tried a minor sharpening and think it would benefit from that, but the only edits I've done here is the tilt correction and then cropping back to rectangular). --jjron (talk) 11:35, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I am not sure about use of this image in Ngorongoro Crater. My image, much worse quality (scanned film image)shows the crater's walls. This one does not. So, yes, it is a good image of a rhino, but I am not sure it is a valued image of rhinos in the crater.--Mbz1 (talk) 12:03, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd say any of the animal images in that article are pretty peripheral and exchangeable, unless there happens to be a species that is endemic to the crater, and I don't think that's the case (not for any of the large animals shown). If that was the only article it was in then it would certainly lack EV. --jjron (talk) 12:39, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  It is what I meant, EV of the this image used in Ngorongoro Crater is less than EV of the other image. Otherwise it is a good image with a good EV, and I Support it, but I believe it should be replaced in Ngorongoro Crater with an old one that was used to be there before.--Mbz1 (talk) 14:16, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Agreed that there's weak EV there, I wasn't aware of a previous image (this one had been in the article when I came across it). Cowtowner (talk) 15:25, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  It was replaced here, but I guess I will replace it back, when the nomination is over.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:36, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There's no reason not to replace it there now. The EV for this is clearly in the Rhinoceros articles, so it wouldn't impact the nom. Discussion about which one is better in that article then really belongs on the article talk page. --jjron (talk) 03:31, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agree 100% with jjron. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 08:47, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support Nice quality, good composition. Jujutacular ^talk 19:35, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Edit1 per nom, though as I said above, it could be sharpened. Unfortunately the horn itself, such a key characteristic, is particularly lacking in sharpness (and, no, that's not just a pun). --jjron (talk) 10:35, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Checks out on my criteria sheet. SMasters (talk) 08:32, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support like I did in the first round of POTY on Commons.--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫T 17:03, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Everybody okay with the edit? Makeemlighter (talk) 21:25, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care; prefer both.--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫T 17:16, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer the edit. Looks to be correct orientation. Jujutacular ^talk 23:45, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Ngorongoro Spitzmaulnashorn edit1.jpg --Makeemlighter (talk) 03:32, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]