Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Masked Tree Frog

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Feb 2011 at 02:49:30 (UTC)

Support as nominator --Benjamint 02:49, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support. High quality, high EV. NauticaShad es 14:04, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment All I have is an intuition-based (exceedingly non-Vulcan) sense that the “vivid” setting on the camera was enabled or someone punched up the saturation in post-processing. I’ve seen ample leaves, including leaves like these in Hawaii, and the colors here *look* unnaturally saturated. Greg L (talk) 21:11, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The lighting seems rather harsh, no? Was it really dark there or something? Purpy Pupple (talk) 06:10, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- It was night time so yeah, it is a nocturnal frog afterall. A better flash set-up would be nice but a little expensive too. Benjamint 04:01, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - That's a good reason. Purpy Pupple (talk) 02:30, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support since it is technically quite good apart from the harsh lighting and I'm sure that high quality free images of this nocturnal frog are hard to come by. Purpy Pupple (talk) 02:30, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support The colours don't look unusual to me. I like the focus on the frog's face. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 12:45, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 17:32, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support < 5, probably worth re-nominating in the future. Makeemlighter (talk) 17:32, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]