Support – it's sharp, Charles! Very attractive colorful photo. --
Janke |
Talk 13:45, 24 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Support Sharp picture, good colors, appropriate contrast...even the bird itself is in a dynamic pose. Very good. --
Veggies (talk) 14:25, 24 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Comment – Colorful for sure, but the up-angle and the relative thickness of the branch obscure some of the subject. Blurry background seems somewhat distracting.
Sca (
talk) 15:19, 24 August 2017 (UTC)reply
I find the blurry background attractive, since it duplicates the coloring of the bird. Doesn't lessen the EV, IMO. --
Janke |
Talk 15:46, 24 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Support – the composition works for me, she blends in, obscured tail is unfortunate.
Bammesk (
talk) 02:49, 25 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Support, nice choice, although indeed the obscured tail is unfortunate.
Brandmeistertalk 19:30, 26 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Weak support – I'm coming round to the colorful aspects. But as usual I'd prefer a tighter crop, particularly from the bottom – to make the branch less obtrusive. (Just throwing that out as a possibility, though I don't expect much agreement.)
Sca (
talk) 16:12, 27 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Comment – I think I have to leave the branch in to frame the hidden tail.
Charlesjsharp (
talk)
I experimented offline with a bottom crop around the fork in the branches (also a bit of a trim on the left and just a shave on the right), and thought it looked good. – A suggestion for zooming in a little.
Sca (
talk) 14:38, 1 September 2017 (UTC)reply
I agree with Sca, but I still support.
Drmies (
talk) 14:47, 1 September 2017 (UTC)reply
The suggestion has merit, but then the bird's eye isn't in the centre, and you lose some nice blue sky on the left, so it's a trade off... –
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 07:32, 2 September 2017 (UTC)reply
Promoted File:Cuban green woodpecker (Xiphidiopicus percussus percussus) female.JPG --
ArmbrustTheHomunculus 13:31, 3 September 2017 (UTC)reply
Support – it's sharp, Charles! Very attractive colorful photo. --
Janke |
Talk 13:45, 24 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Support Sharp picture, good colors, appropriate contrast...even the bird itself is in a dynamic pose. Very good. --
Veggies (talk) 14:25, 24 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Comment – Colorful for sure, but the up-angle and the relative thickness of the branch obscure some of the subject. Blurry background seems somewhat distracting.
Sca (
talk) 15:19, 24 August 2017 (UTC)reply
I find the blurry background attractive, since it duplicates the coloring of the bird. Doesn't lessen the EV, IMO. --
Janke |
Talk 15:46, 24 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Support – the composition works for me, she blends in, obscured tail is unfortunate.
Bammesk (
talk) 02:49, 25 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Support, nice choice, although indeed the obscured tail is unfortunate.
Brandmeistertalk 19:30, 26 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Weak support – I'm coming round to the colorful aspects. But as usual I'd prefer a tighter crop, particularly from the bottom – to make the branch less obtrusive. (Just throwing that out as a possibility, though I don't expect much agreement.)
Sca (
talk) 16:12, 27 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Comment – I think I have to leave the branch in to frame the hidden tail.
Charlesjsharp (
talk)
I experimented offline with a bottom crop around the fork in the branches (also a bit of a trim on the left and just a shave on the right), and thought it looked good. – A suggestion for zooming in a little.
Sca (
talk) 14:38, 1 September 2017 (UTC)reply
I agree with Sca, but I still support.
Drmies (
talk) 14:47, 1 September 2017 (UTC)reply
The suggestion has merit, but then the bird's eye isn't in the centre, and you lose some nice blue sky on the left, so it's a trade off... –
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 07:32, 2 September 2017 (UTC)reply
Promoted File:Cuban green woodpecker (Xiphidiopicus percussus percussus) female.JPG --
ArmbrustTheHomunculus 13:31, 3 September 2017 (UTC)reply