Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Blue and Yellow Macaw

Blue and Yellow Macaw

Articles in which this image appears: Blue-and-yellow Macaw, Neotropical parrot
Creator: Benjamint 13:15, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support as nominator --Benjamint 13:15, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please elaborate on the postprocessing? Thanks. --Dschwen 13:18, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RAW conversion and postprocessing done by Fir, I'll see him this evening so I can ask but it was nothing more than usual, it was a nice image to begin with. Benjamint 21:29, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, well, send him my regards ;-). It just looks like a nuclear-parrot to me, or maybe a blacklight-disco-parrot. Then again parrots are not very common in the american midwest, so what do I know... --Dschwen 15:43, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -- the 2:5 aspect ratio pushes all the infobox content right down to the bottom of both the articles it's used in. It doesn't create a nicely composed photograph. The background is interesting and not particularly distracting, so I don't see why the narrow crop is needed. I'd prefer something in the region of 2:3 or even 3:4. NotFromUtrecht (talk) 16:25, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose -- for the reasons above, since no alt version has been forthcoming. Also, it does look a bit over-processed. NotFromUtrecht (talk) 08:00, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Support Beautiful composition, but the background is a bit distracting. Nothing too serious, though. The Utahraptor (talk) 01:18, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support It is nice! Little wow. Feathers are cute! --Tadija^taking 00:52, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Mbz1 (talk) 00:58, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose looks fake, overprocessed/oversaturated. --Dschwen 02:47, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 04:33, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Only 3.5 of 5 required supports. Makeemlighter (talk) 04:33, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]