Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/File:Crescent Honeyeater Edit2.jpg

Crescent Honeyeater female

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2011 at 10:02:23 (UTC)

Reason: The image to be delisted was my first featured picture, but I think it is time to replace it with something better. It is quite likely that the replacement is the same bird, a solitary female visits my garden each winter. I used a number of remote flashes with the new image to allow me to increase the depth of field significantly over what'd normally be possible with the amount of ambient light present, an experiment for dark locations when using a hide. The new image has lower contrast, and is much higher in resolution, greatly improving the visible detail and EV. The background to the replacement is actually a painted piece of MDF, which I've made a little more yellow for next time.
Articles this image appears in: Crescent Honeyeater, Honeyeater, List of honeyeaters
Previous nomination/s: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Crescent Honeyeater Edit.jpg
Nominator: JJ Harrison (talk)

Delist & Replace — JJ Harrison (talk) 10:02, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace; higher EV in the new picture, better contrast. Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:04, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Replacement image is not in either of the relevant articles. There should be a consensus on the article pages about which image is preferred before the nomination. Or, at least, the other image should be used so the the discussion here carries some weight. Cowtowner (talk) 10:16, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- (Put it in the crescent honeyeater article). JJ Harrison (talk) 10:49, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - By the way, sometimes you get circular arguments. Like people reverting replacements of featured images because they are featured (rather than on merit), if that makes sense. JJ Harrison (talk) 10:53, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Understood. My thought would be though that if it's really a better image it'll stand on its own merit and stick. To me it's best to avoid the situation where we delist something and promote another only to have the new one go unused and us have to delist it again. Cowtowner (talk) 19:50, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      - I consider it unlikely in this case given that I've taken all but one of the available photos of this species. JJ Harrison (talk) 00:23, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
D&R Better than the old one. IMO, the lighting makes it look a bit artificial though --Muhammad(talk) 10:31, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm not really comfortable with the use of an artificial background, especially one so unnatural in colour. Colin°^Talk 19:38, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The first photo wins by showing more habitat. Samsara (FA • FP) 13:47, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Neither is natural habitat, though the species is a common winter garden vistor. JJ Harrison (talk) 09:06, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delist & Replace I don't mind having two of the same kind of featured picture, the Featured picture criteria don't have a problem with it either. But here I think the new picture is much better, the resolution's higher and there's much less noise. I don't mind having a bit of painted wood in the background, I think it gives good contrast so we can see the bird clearly. TehGrauniad (talk) 21:23, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
oppose new The background is garish and looks fake (I thought it was photoshop until I read your explanation). I can see the quality improvement, but if this were a fresh vote, I wouldn't support either. --99of9 (talk) 06:04, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kept —Julia\^talk 13:10, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]