Comment - Minuscule amount of motion blurring, causing some feather-ghosting. Not sure if it can still be considered for WP:FP but worth a shot.
GerifalteDelSabana (
talk) 05:26, 17 February 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment: The image hasn't been stable in the article for any time at all, really, and this is a heavily illustrated article. I'm not sure how much "staying power" the image will have. You've really captured a moment, and it's a well-composed photo (slightly distracting background, perhaps), but I am not sure the technical quality is where we've come to expect bird photos to be - especially for such a common species living in such close proximity to humans.
Josh Milburn (
talk) 19:19, 17 February 2020 (UTC)reply
@
J Milburn: True, you have a point there. But looking at the category of C. splendens photos, I reckon this is still the highest quality image in the wiki at the moment. I haven't gone out for photography in some time and the crows have seemingly forgotten me, but I'll try to take a clearer shot soon, if possible.
GerifalteDelSabana (
talk) 00:08, 18 February 2020 (UTC)reply
I can't disagree with Josh's points, but the dramatic composition leads me to Support (assuming image is stable during nomination).
Bammesk (
talk) 02:22, 18 February 2020 (UTC)reply
The bar for bird FPs is a little higher than this (sorry, we've been spoilt). That said, I might be persuaded to support if the fish can be IDed.
MER-C 20:47, 20 February 2020 (UTC)reply