Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Mother and baby sperm whale.jpg

File:Mother and baby sperm whale.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Mar 2013 at 13:16:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Mother and baby sperm whale.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Mother and baby sperm whale.jpg

•  Info created by Gabriel Barathieu - uploaded by Kurzon - nominated by Kurzon -- Kurzon (talk) 13:16, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
•  Support -- Kurzon (talk) 13:16, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
•  Question I don't know much about underwater photography, but is it normal for animals to be so soft/blurry at full resolution? It definitely looks great at lower resolutions. -- ~y (talk) 19:54, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Kruusamägi (talk) 11:54, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Wow factor, rare picture and correct quality for an underwater photography--Citron (talk) 11:52, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks, wasn't sure about it. :) -- ~y (talk) 11:58, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

•  Support As per Citron -- ~y (talk) 11:58, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
•  Support amazing. Jml3 (talk)
•  Support Quality is sufficient for underwater. If it's a bit unsharp, just let it be unsharp, don't oversharpen it like this one. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:46, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose Atrocious quality does not mitigate the wow.  B.p. 21:09, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
•  Question Right color compared to this? JKadavoor Jee 05:20, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
•  Neutral as per Jkadavoor. That one is certainly better, so no. Yann (talk) 06:53, 26 February 2013 (UTC)I changed my vote to Neutral after the comments below. Yann (talk) 06:58, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

• I'm glad you liked that one, but that one is an image I myself retouched, using this base image, which was rejected in a previous vote for being "oversharpened". The image above, on the other hand, is supposed to be a natural, unaltered photograph. Given how big these animals are, they must be photographed at a distance to capture them in full profile, and thus the image will be inevitably blurred by the water.Kurzon (talk) 07:54, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

• I'm not talented enough to evaluate sharpening issues; my only concern is about real colours. Which is the real colour? JKadavoor Jee 17:03, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

• This blurry blue is the original. The only thing I did to the image above is crop it.Kurzon (talk) 18:01, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

• OK; thanks. JKadavoor Jee 11:04, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

•  Support — Underwater photographs in open ocean are inevitably going to be blurry unless one resorts to overenthusiastic recoloring/sharpening tricks like File:Sperm whale pod recolored.jpg. I prefer the natural over the artificially enhanced. Stigmatella aurantiaca (talk) 04:16, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
•  Support ...understanding the circumstances. Of course one would hope for a less blurred effect from the water from a distance but then again one should find such whales somewhere the water is very stable and does have almost no minerals or organic material I guess... Now how difficult would that be. --Ximonic (talk) 11:54, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

• If you were to look at sperm whale photographs on Google Images (here's a link for you), you would see that this is actually a pretty good photo as far as underwater shots of whales go. Some photos are crisper, but they are often shots of small juveniles, or close-ups of the head. I'd say this is the best photo on the Web that captures the whale is full profile, and we should all be thankful that Mr Barathieu agreed to release it under CCA.Kurzon (talk) 13:56, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

• May be; I noticed the big wow on it in Flickr. Here some more funny links :) JKadavoor Jee 17:00, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

• Indeed, Kurzon. You are right and that's what I'm talking about. I also did try to search for such pictures of whole whales under water from Google. Although many pictures can be found, it is difficult to find a large and sharp one showing the entire adult. Yours is very good in comparison. And Jkadavoor, awesome pictures yet quite small! ;) I wonder what would they look in a featurable resolution. --Ximonic (talk) 19:07, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

• Yes; not many people are generous enough to give away their rights, posts only down-scaled versions. Thanks, Barathieu Gabriel Barathieu (I don't know his nationality; calling surname may be considered as rude ) for this. JKadavoor Jee 05:36, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

• Mr Barathieu is French, and you should prefix the surname with "Mr" when addressing someone directly.Kurzon (talk) 10:25, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

• Quite accidental; nowadays I'm supporting people from there, too much. (And thanks for that "Mr." part. Everyday I'm learning new things.) JKadavoor Jee 10:50, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

•  Support forget to support (per Ximonic). JKadavoor Jee 05:38, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Nothing more to add... It is among the best photos I've seen on commons. - Averater (talk) 08:57, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 16:53, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals