- Articles in which this image appears
- Blue-and-yellow Macaw, Neotropical parrot
- Creator
- Benjamint 13:15, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- Support as nominator -- Benjamint 13:15, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- Can you please elaborate on the postprocessing? Thanks. -- Dschwen 13:18, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- RAW conversion and postprocessing done by Fir, I'll see him this evening so I can ask but it was nothing more than usual, it was a nice image to begin with.
Benjamint
21:29, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hm, well, send him my regards ;-). It just looks like a nuclear-parrot to me, or maybe a blacklight-disco-parrot. Then again parrots are not very common in the american midwest, so what do I know... -- Dschwen 15:43, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
- Comment -- the 2:5 aspect ratio pushes all the infobox content right down to the bottom of both the articles it's used in. It doesn't create a nicely composed photograph. The background is interesting and not particularly distracting, so I don't see why the narrow crop is needed. I'd prefer something in the region of 2:3 or even 3:4. NotFromUtrecht ( talk) 16:25, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose -- for the reasons above, since no alt version has been forthcoming. Also, it does look a bit over-processed. NotFromUtrecht ( talk) 08:00, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
- Weak Support Beautiful composition, but the background is a bit distracting. Nothing too serious, though. The Utahraptor ( talk) 01:18, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- Support It is nice! Little wow. Feathers are cute! -- Tadija taking 00:52, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
- Support-- Mbz1 ( talk) 00:58, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose looks fake, overprocessed/oversaturated. -- Dschwen 02:47, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Not promoted -- Makeemlighter ( talk) 04:33, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
- Only 3.5 of 5 required supports. Makeemlighter ( talk) 04:33, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
- Articles in which this image appears
- Blue-and-yellow Macaw, Neotropical parrot
- Creator
- Benjamint 13:15, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- Support as nominator -- Benjamint 13:15, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- Can you please elaborate on the postprocessing? Thanks. -- Dschwen 13:18, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- RAW conversion and postprocessing done by Fir, I'll see him this evening so I can ask but it was nothing more than usual, it was a nice image to begin with.
Benjamint
21:29, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hm, well, send him my regards ;-). It just looks like a nuclear-parrot to me, or maybe a blacklight-disco-parrot. Then again parrots are not very common in the american midwest, so what do I know... -- Dschwen 15:43, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
- Comment -- the 2:5 aspect ratio pushes all the infobox content right down to the bottom of both the articles it's used in. It doesn't create a nicely composed photograph. The background is interesting and not particularly distracting, so I don't see why the narrow crop is needed. I'd prefer something in the region of 2:3 or even 3:4. NotFromUtrecht ( talk) 16:25, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose -- for the reasons above, since no alt version has been forthcoming. Also, it does look a bit over-processed. NotFromUtrecht ( talk) 08:00, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
- Weak Support Beautiful composition, but the background is a bit distracting. Nothing too serious, though. The Utahraptor ( talk) 01:18, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- Support It is nice! Little wow. Feathers are cute! -- Tadija taking 00:52, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
- Support-- Mbz1 ( talk) 00:58, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose looks fake, overprocessed/oversaturated. -- Dschwen 02:47, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Not promoted -- Makeemlighter ( talk) 04:33, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
- Only 3.5 of 5 required supports. Makeemlighter ( talk) 04:33, 25 March 2010 (UTC)