Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:001 Olive-bellied Sunbird starting to fly at Kibale National Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg

File:001 Olive-bellied Sunbird starting to fly at Kibale National Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Apr 2024 at 00:53:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:001 Olive-bellied Sunbird starting to fly at Kibale National Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:001 Olive-bellied Sunbird starting to fly at Kibale National Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Nectariniidae (Sunbirds_and_Spiderhunters)
•  Info created by Giles Laurent - uploaded by Giles Laurent - nominated by Giles Laurent -- Giles Laurent (talk) 00:53, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
•  Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 00:53, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
•  Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:41, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
•  Support ★ 14:51, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
•  Support Beautiful bird, cool posture, nice background. – Aristeas (talk) 15:58, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
•  Oppose It has been so over-processed that there is no definition at all on the feathers. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:31, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

  Thank you for your review. This is an action shot of a small bird captured at 1/2000s and ISO 4000 was needed since it is a dark forest. The feathers are just as fine as they can get in such conditions, especially with no direct light of the sun. This picture has just as much feather definition than the latest featured pictures of small birds in flight, if not more : 1, 2 3. Giles Laurent (talk) 18:16, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

   Comment I’d wish for more definition on the feathers, too, but voters just have decide how is important this is for them. In that recent nomination there is IMHO even less definition on the feathers, but no voter has objected (Wilfredor and me were the only ones to comment on the definition question); that was a bird in flight, yes, but on the other hand it had more light than this one; therefore because that nomination has passed without any objections, we cannot complain much on this one about the missing definition, can we? – Aristeas (talk) 20:00, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

  I did mention the overprocessing on the flycatcher FP Aristeas. Those three compositions were all borderline quality, but were more compelling compositions than this one. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:35, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

   Comment I remember when I lived in Venezuela, at a time when Caracas was considered the most dangerous city in the world, photographing in those streets was a daily risk, not only because of the expensive equipment, but also for one's life. However, the images I captured often received lukewarm reactions on FPC: “no wow”. This greatly frustrated me, as most other users, located in peaceful European cities filled with splendid architecture, faced no such issues. The lesson I learned over time was that a photograph must be able to speak for itself. It shouldn’t matter if it was raining that day, if it was cloudy or sunny, if the place was dangerous, or if I was sick that day. The quality of my photographic equipment shouldn’t matter either. Circumstantial factors are secondary to the visual message that the image must convey. Photographers are frequently expected to explain or justify our images based on these external circumstances, but in reality, the power of a good photograph lies in its ability to transcend those details and connect with the viewer. It is the viewer’s responsibility to investigate and understand the context if they wish, but as photographers, our duty is to capture and transmit emotions and realities that speak beyond the immediate circumstances Wilfredor (talk) 20:26, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

•  Support--Ermell (talk) 21:28, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
•  Support --SHB2000 (talk) 09:55, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
•  Support Per Aristeas --Palauenc05 (talk) 11:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
•  Support --XRay 💬 17:51, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
•  Oppose Not convinced either, I believe that the lighting conditions were very difficult (bad luck, not the best spot,...who knows) but this quality + composition isn't at FP level to me, sorry. Poco a poco (talk) 08:07, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

  Thank you for your review. The thing is that with wildlife you can’t decide the light settings, you have to photograph the animal where it is and adapt yourself to its environment. Moreover it is inevitable to go to high ISO and have more challenging light if you want to photograph a bird beginning to fly. I personally think that I was quite lucky to capture this bird in action and with a pose that let’s us admire its beautiful plumage: it is only with wings wide open that you can see the yellow bellow the bird wings and the bird is perfectly positioned to show it to us. I’ve seen no other photography on the internet showcasing the yellow part of this bird (only drawn illustrations in books) as this bird is usually only photographed in static position with wings closed. Giles Laurent (talk) 10:07, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:24, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
•  Support--Berthold Werner (talk) 16:24, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
•  Support-- Riad Salih (talk) 16:39, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
•  Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:50, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
•  Support JukoFF (talk) 14:35, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 05:13, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Nectariniidae (Sunbirds and Spiderhunters)