Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Panthera onca

Panthera onca edit

Original - Panthera onca (Jaguar) at Toronto Zoo

Edit 1 by Thegreenj

Reason: Fantastic high definition image which simultaneously displays both the beauty and the power of the jaguar
Articles this image appears in: Jaguar
Creator: MarcusObal

Support as nominator Pm504 (talk)
Oppose Grainy and unsharp; bluish lighting.--HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 01:57, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit 1 is a valiant try to make something out of nothing, but nope, it's still unusable.--HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 19:00, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose both I've uploaded an edit, but technical condition is still quite poor. Thegreenj 02:11, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose (with regret) it's ashame to oppose such a great shot, however while the visual may be impressive, the technical flaws are an issue. I downloaded this image and despite using one of the most advanced noise reduction programs available, still could not remove a lot of the noise. There is chromatic aberration present, notice the green hues on the chin. Sharpness and lighting are also out, both also un-fixable using advanced filters. Really a shame. Capital photographer (talk) 07:20, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Edit 1 - Its an amazing image - sure there is a bit of noise, but still very impressive. ← κεηηε∂γ ^{(shout at me)} 08:43, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Just a few too many faults that cannot be fixed. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 10:48, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The only relevant flaw is of course the prominent stuck pixel right between beasts jaws that none of the critics seems to notice. -- 80.152.180.137 (talk) 22:33, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Because it's barely noticable, perhaps? Thegreenj 23:12, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - at full res it is quite noticeable Thisglad (talk) 00:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. At 800x550, it's almost alright, but at full size it's pretty bad. Spinach Dip 01:55, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm suspicious about that dark jaw in edit 1, I wonder if the edit has added colours that weren't there in the animal. Narayanese (talk) 05:49, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Definitely. As I said in my comment, there is strng chormatic aberation in the shot, including the darkened and green tinted jaw. Capital photographer (talk) 06:30, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I have no clue what the original colors were. I used three different white balances and blended them together. Also, I did not lighten or darken anything—that certain colors appear brighter or darker is an optical illusion. Examine both in an image editor, and you'll find that they have identical luminosity, aside from some sharpening. I know edit 1 is a bit sloppy; it was made more to replace the original, whose colors definitely weren't there in the animal, with the edit, which should be somewhat more accurate. Thegreenj 15:52, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - You don't know what the original colours were? It's a Jaguar, not a rare Amazonian Macaw, there are only so many to choose from, none of which are green. Also stumped by "optical illusion".Capital photographer (talk) 16:34, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - I think the edit actually ended up less jaguar-like, as I'm fairly sure jaguars don't have orange pigment on the lower part of the head. The intriguing metallic shine in the original isn't that bad (neither version is FP quality though). Narayanese (talk) 17:14, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - I can't find the image illustrating this right now (I've seen it somewhere around here.), but basically, the eye is more sensitive to certain frequencies of light than others. Check this in an image editing program, and, except for some sharpening, I think you'll find luminosity is unchanged. About the colors themselves: I have not seen a jaguar in a very long time. I don't know what the color of their snouts are: white, light orange, orange. The edit was an educated guess; I thought orange more probable than blue. That said, the whole point of Wikipedia is that if you know how make it better, you can very easily. If my edit is inaccurate, there's nothing stopping you from uploading a new, more accurate edit and replacing mine. Thegreenj 18:46, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - The only colours you'll find on a Jaguar are shades or orange, white, cream and grey. Not green or blue. The errors in this image are beyond what can be corrected in software. Capital photographer (talk) 05:53, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurry and still seemingly miscoloured. Spencer^T♦^C 19:29, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --jjron (talk) 12:44, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]