Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Giant Petrel

Giant Petrel edit

Original

Reason: A rare action shot taken in a very remote region.
Proposed caption: A Giant petrel is feeding on a Antarctic Fur Seal carcass at South Georgia Island. We assumed that a Antarctic Fur Seal was killed by an Orca.
Articles this image appears in: Giant Petrel, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands
Creator: Mbz1

Support as nominator Mbz1 18:28, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment When I first decided to visit South Georgia, I called a travel agent and asked, if they have tours to South Georgia. "No" - she replied - "but we do have tours to North Carolina". She believed I was asking about tours to Georgia (U.S. state). It was really funny and I realized that not so many people are familiar with the unique, beautiful, but very remote South Georgia.It is one of the reason I'd like the image to get an FP status.--Mbz1 18:36, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. It's a pretty good snapshot but the color contrast seems odd (possibly improvable) and the subject is slightly out of focus, the carcass even more so. Not up to our nature photography standards and not unique enough an image. --Dhartung | Talk 05:08, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I must admitt that the picture is a digital picture of my old film picture(I do not have a scanner).Of course the original is much better. If somebody could improve the nominated image, it will be great. I do not think we have any FP from South Georgia.--Mbz1 05:22, 28 September 2007 (UTC)Mbz1[reply]
  - Comment. I tried an edit on this to attempt to improve the quality, but the detail is just not there, the original quality is too poor. The edit is a little bit better, but not really worth uploading. Maybe if you could recapture the original film photo a bit better it would be worth trying again, but there's some issues such as badly blown out areas on the wings and body of the bird that I suspect are there in the original. It's a good picture, but as far as an FP is concerned, I can't see it overcoming the significant quality concerns. --jjron 06:21, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unfortunately, too high contrast and blown highlights. Amazing, though, if this is a digital camera image of a printed photo. You'd really need to get the negative (or slide) scanned to improve this. --Janke | Talk 10:53, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Few weeks ago I went to Best Buy to see, if I could find a negative scanner. I did. It was very bulky, very expensive. Besides I have thousands upon thousands old negatives and it is not easy to find the wanted one. Sometimes, it is not so easy even to find a wanted print. I thought about the time I would loose to look for negatives and I decided not to buy a scanner.--Mbz1 13:27, 28 September 2007 (UTC)Mbz1[reply]
Oppose - Per above --Childzy ¤ Talk 12:28, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for votes and comments, everybody.Thank you, Jjron, for working on the image. I withdraw the nomination--Mbz1 13:27, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted -- Chris B • talk 09:33, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]