Support as nominator --
jjron (
talk) 13:29, 30 September 2009 (UTC)reply
Weak Oppose Cut off - would be better with full shot of animal... It's damned cute though...
Gazhiley (
talk) 13:49, 30 September 2009 (UTC)reply
Weak support Expecting a full length shot of animals can be too much sometimes since it can lead to an awkward picture and poor composition. That said, the photos is a bit soft, but I still like it and it works well in the articles. upstateNYer 02:17, 1 October 2009 (UTC)reply
Oppose I like it but unfortunately it's full of artifacts and motion blur. ZooFari 02:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC)reply
Weak support Would I prefer a full shot? Yes, but this image is still loaded with EV. I don't see any of the motion blur ZooFari mentions, and the artefacting is minimal IMO.
Staxringoldtalkcontribs 17:58, 1 October 2009 (UTC)reply
Support. High Enc Value. The cutoff is unfortunate, but this still illustrates enough of the animal to be highly useful.
Mostlyharmless (
talk) 22:51, 5 October 2009 (UTC)reply
Support as nominator --
jjron (
talk) 13:29, 30 September 2009 (UTC)reply
Weak Oppose Cut off - would be better with full shot of animal... It's damned cute though...
Gazhiley (
talk) 13:49, 30 September 2009 (UTC)reply
Weak support Expecting a full length shot of animals can be too much sometimes since it can lead to an awkward picture and poor composition. That said, the photos is a bit soft, but I still like it and it works well in the articles. upstateNYer 02:17, 1 October 2009 (UTC)reply
Oppose I like it but unfortunately it's full of artifacts and motion blur. ZooFari 02:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC)reply
Weak support Would I prefer a full shot? Yes, but this image is still loaded with EV. I don't see any of the motion blur ZooFari mentions, and the artefacting is minimal IMO.
Staxringoldtalkcontribs 17:58, 1 October 2009 (UTC)reply
Support. High Enc Value. The cutoff is unfortunate, but this still illustrates enough of the animal to be highly useful.
Mostlyharmless (
talk) 22:51, 5 October 2009 (UTC)reply