Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Song sparrow

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Jun 2022 at 10:47:32 (UTC)

Reason: Was seen on Commons FPC last week, where it was featured unanimously.
Articles in which this image appears: Song sparrow etc.
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator: Rhododendrites

Support as nominator – MER-C 10:47, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – zoom in on the bird's left foot, two of the digits, I guess digits 2 and 3, are just floating off of the branch!? It looks like careless cloning. Bammesk (talk) 03:52, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I can't believe that 20 voters, including me, missed this massive cloning error, Rhododendrites. You should probably delist at Commons. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:30, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Debilitating cloning error. --Janke | Talk 11:42, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Charlesjsharp and Janke: Err, there's no cloning error -- there's not even any cloning. I guess it looks a little odd, but that is indeed the way it was standing. Song sparrows are pretty adept at hanging out to the tops of grasses, branches, fences -- just about anything, after all. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 11:50, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Missed a ping @Bammesk: — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 11:53, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- OK, striking my oppose, since you as the photographer know the details of any edits. But why is there a double contour on the claw and branch? Some photoshopping error? --Janke | Talk 11:58, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - I don't know what you mean? There's not a lot of editing that went into this one: crop, tones, denoise -- that's it. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 12:39, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    - Look at the very top of the branches, and the knuckles of the bird's feet, I see a slight double contour there. Not a reason to oppose, though. --Janke | Talk 14:19, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I need new glasses @Rhododendrites:. I've marked the right hand claws which do not seem to be attached to the bird. Sincere apologies if this is an optical illusion. I will of course remove my oppose. I do see a 'double image' around that area too. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:26, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- An illusion, apparently. If really necessary, I can send you the RAW file. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 15:33, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I've added a note. Look carefully at the rightmost toe of its right leg. You can see the left leg extends just behind that claw. One of the toes of its left leg grasps behind that little branch and the others go over it, angled forward a little. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 15:38, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's hard (for me) to imagine the toes going over that little branch. But since that's what the RAW file shows, then it is what it is. It just "looks" strange or disjoint. I am neutral on this nom, no longer for the look of the toes and the branch (since it is in the RAW file), but just generally. Bammesk (talk) 02:35, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just don't get it, but the RAW file cannot lie. Have withdrawn oppose and ordered new glasses. Still don't know how the doubled image happened. I wonder if @Poco a poco: can reassure me that I'm just blind, not mad? Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:43, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Charlesjsharp: No trick here IMHO and per Rhododendrites's confirmation. It looks really awkward and the first impression is indeed that there is something wrong there, but looking closer there is an explanation. I don't find the double image/contour so disturbing or a real issue here --Poc o² 19:33, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

- I have a theory: The double contours are due to the noise reduction of the background, the selection area may have shifted a bit upwards and caused the effect. You actually see it on the top of the beak, too. --Janke | Talk 11:05, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I assume that the double contours are due to a slight movement of the branch during the exposure. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 19:01, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No. It would be a blur. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:23, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support "cloning" issue seems sorted out. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 02:36, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Odd, but there we are. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.9% of all FPs} 18:12, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 12:54, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 12:54, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]