Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:033 Male Ugandan kob trying to seduce a female at Queen Elizabeth National Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:033 Male Ugandan kob trying to seduce a female at Queen Elizabeth National Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg, featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Dec 2023 at 13:53:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Bovidae (Bovids)
- Info created by Giles Laurent - uploaded by Giles Laurent - nominated by Giles Laurent -- Giles Laurent (talk) 13:53, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 13:53, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
OpposeFantastic composition, less impressive post-processing (e.g., sharpening artefacts in the fur, halos and aliasing in the grass blades). --Julesvernex2 (talk) 16:32, 4 December 2023 (UTC)- Thank you for your review, I uploaded a new version with no aliasing on the grass. For the white around the tip of some grass blades it is natural and not halo. As for the fur I think it is fine and I don’t see artefacts. Giles Laurent (talk) 22:13, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
- From the three versions you've uploaded, I think the first one is the best: it's softer and noisier, but suffers much less from oversharpening. It's a great result for a shot taken at 600mm and cropped to ~20% of its original resolution, but I don't think it's at the level of your other wildlife images. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 08:48, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for your comment. I don't see oversharpening on the fur. This picture is an action shot of animal behavior (an uganda kob trying to seduce a female (that in the end was not receptive, but the male got lucky with another female). In animal behavior you almost never know when something is going to happen before it is happening and 99% of the time, nothing special happens (only grass eating with the animal's head down, or moving). When something is finally happening you have to quickly move your lens to point it to the place the action is happening (a place where you're not necessarily already pointing at as the animals might have just been with the head down and not very visible), have the right parameters ready (which might have to be changed especially if photographing a still subject just before, which is often the case) and finaly press the button without shaking the camera. In that process many things can go wrong and the animal action often only lasts a few seconds so you have to be very quickly. In this case it was shot at 1/800s which is more than sufficient for such movement. Animal behavior beeing more rare and a lot more difficult to capture, I think that such pictures are generaly of higher value than pictures of still subjects. Therefore in my opinion this shot is of higher level than other shots of still subjects that I have made. Also, even if it wasn't as the same level of the others pictures I made, in my opinion it is still of FP level. Giles Laurent (talk) 10:38, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- I have no trouble believing that the shot was difficult to make (I own the same lens and have never captured anything nearly as exciting), and I suspect that the majority will agree with you that it is still at FP level. The FP threshold is (perhaps unavoidably) loosely defined, so disagreements here are to be expected. Less so on oversharpening, which should not be subjective. —Julesvernex2 (talk) 11:23, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- New file uploaded with sharpening of the fur reduced. What do you think now Julesvernex2 ? Giles Laurent (talk) 19:47, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks Giles, I think the artefacts are now mostly relegated to pixel peeping levels and I'm swayed by your explanation of the challenges of the shot, so switching to Support --Julesvernex2 (talk) 21:04, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- I have no trouble believing that the shot was difficult to make (I own the same lens and have never captured anything nearly as exciting), and I suspect that the majority will agree with you that it is still at FP level. The FP threshold is (perhaps unavoidably) loosely defined, so disagreements here are to be expected. Less so on oversharpening, which should not be subjective. —Julesvernex2 (talk) 11:23, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- From the three versions you've uploaded, I think the first one is the best: it's softer and noisier, but suffers much less from oversharpening. It's a great result for a shot taken at 600mm and cropped to ~20% of its original resolution, but I don't think it's at the level of your other wildlife images. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 08:48, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
OpposeLooks like you are trying to save a picture which wasn't correctly focused. - Benh (talk) 23:27, 4 December 2023 (UTC)- Thank you for your review. As Basile said, I also think that both subjects are in focus. That also was the case in the first version. Giles Laurent (talk) 11:14, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- The result is still soft overall and I feel you hopelessly attempt to oversharpen it to make up for that, resulting in the small artifacts. - Benh (talk) 13:36, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- New file uploaded with sharpening reduced. What do you think now Benh ? Giles Laurent (talk) 21:27, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- I think it's a bit better so I removed my oppose. - Benh (talk) 10:12, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
- New file uploaded with sharpening reduced. What do you think now Benh ? Giles Laurent (talk) 21:27, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- The result is still soft overall and I feel you hopelessly attempt to oversharpen it to make up for that, resulting in the small artifacts. - Benh (talk) 13:36, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for your review. As Basile said, I also think that both subjects are in focus. That also was the case in the first version. Giles Laurent (talk) 11:14, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- Support Interesting action shot of animals in a natural environment. The speed 1/800s was very appropriate in my view, to freeze the movement. The horns are in focus and the DoF quite successful to show both animals with a consistent level of detail -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:42, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- I am guessing this shot was taken hand-held with a bean-bag or special support from a safari vehicle. With my 500mm lens I find 1/1000 sec to 1/1250 my good-to-go setting in readiness for action shots. I suspect 1/800 sec with your 600mm lens will demand a very steady hand, especially if the engine is running. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:43, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- The engine was not running as it was a long break to observe. Also, I usually have quite a steady hand and the sensor 5-axis stabilisation compensation of the camera body and the lens stabilisation help with the rest. Giles Laurent (talk) 19:58, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- I am guessing this shot was taken hand-held with a bean-bag or special support from a safari vehicle. With my 500mm lens I find 1/1000 sec to 1/1250 my good-to-go setting in readiness for action shots. I suspect 1/800 sec with your 600mm lens will demand a very steady hand, especially if the engine is running. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:43, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- Support Thanks very much for your edits; as for the grass, it's better now. -- Radomianin (talk) 08:22, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- Support - ABAL1412🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺 (talk ☭) 19:10, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 08:52, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 15:09, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 15:52, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Jakubhal 10:23, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 23:04, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 13:04, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Bovidae (Bovids)