326:- the overall softness and poor definition is due to the scanner on which it was digitized, I think. It looks like the original, although sharp, may not have been a chrome but a color neg, which would explain the "color noise" (which is actually film grain) and lack of overall density. I feel I can't vote for this in its current form, not because of this but because of the noise reduction edits: a crop and clean-up were needed, but everything else has reduced definition still further.
62:
70:
81:
34:
716:, oppose the others. If the ugly discolorization of the original is fixed the picture meets the bare minimum for tec. Enc and art seem generally supported. I'd like to have a wider crop than my own, but so far no one has fixed the ugly border. The whales themselves are ok, barely. Edit 3 is also far too yellow on my monitor. ~
702:. Add to this the fact that we are looking at an intimate moment between two individuals who, if what we think we know about orcas is true, will never separate. I believe this is an iconic picture of the most stable bond known in the animal kingdom. Can we forgive the fact that the snow doesn't look good?
697:
As he is a scientist first and a photographer second he think he has lent the original to someone and can't find it anymore. There is strong evidence that the Type C orca is a new species, in an age when it is common belief that all the large mammal species on the planet were discovered long ago,
693:
Although the image is, in theory, replaceable, mikaul's point is not far off. The Type C orca lives only in
Antarctic waters. Photography in polar conditions is no joke. There are no captive or dead specimens of the Type C orca. There are few people who have seen Type Cs, and only a handful of
527:
I'm not sure if this is what you were referring to, but I guess I should mention that the orca colourings are correct. Although most orcas are black and white, young calves are black and yellowish, and adult
Antarctic orcas also have this yellowish tinge because of the diatoms in the water.
467:- edits have made some improvement but the original is very poor quality. Blur won't be fixable by any amount of editing, and there's also a lot of fringing. Looks to have been taken a long time ago with a not-superb-quality film camera, and deteriorated before being scanned. --
670:- We've seen some good editing on this image. That's of benefit to the article and to be encouraged, even if the result still isn't FP-standard. To me, this is a nice image but by no means unique or irreplaceable, even if it's a pretty rare scene - if it was a photo of a
414:
100:. I think it would be a sweet one for the Main Page on May 13, which in many countries is Mother's Day. I hope the pink and green stripes down the side can be edited out - maybe someone more Photoshop-savvy than I am could do it?
678:
then the quality would be acceptable. As it is, the quality of the original is just too poor, and the edits have very little to work with. An interesting and encyclopaedic photo, but not among our 'best' wildlife images.
314:- I'm not sure what it is, but it looks more like a still from a digital movie than a real photo. The quality is very poor, which is bizarre given the amazing subject matter and composition. Something weird is going on.
418:
52:
between female Orcas and their offspring is strong and often persists throughout life. Type C Orcas are smaller than other types, and have a distinctively forward-slanting eye patch. They may be a separate
638:
make a decision. Any points it might lose on 'critical sharpness' criteria is more than made up for with the unique nature of the capture. This is a quality image by WP:FP standards.
183:
fringing taken care of pretty well, colors look better now too and of course the subject is marvelous. In fact so impressive is the scene I would have supported the original. -
338:
I have e-mailed the photographer asking if it's possible to have the original re-scanned at higher resolution. Thanks everyone for the comments, edits, and advice so far.
768:
350:
I'm not a photographer, so the technical criticism may be valid. But as WP reader, the picture is just amazing. Far, far above the quality of the average POTD.
630:
Edit 3. This has always been a great 'moment' shot of very high encyclopedic value. Can I respectfully suggest that those opposing it on "quality" grounds read
578:
421:
have been opposed for being propaganda... which I think is an improper reason. So, I was just joking around. The second part of my comment is why I opposed.
758:
647:
They're not extinct. Another picture could always be taken. There's nothing spectacularly informative about this one to override the quality issues.
17:
763:
96:
article: the recent discovery of different forms of the species, and the mother-calf relationship. I believe this would be the first FP of a
357:
288:
Yeah, I hate to hear you say it. I uploaded a new one (the string removed) over the old (I assume you're going to support now. ; p ) -
744:
720:
706:
688:
660:
642:
622:
606:
585:
569:
553:
532:
522:
500:
488:
476:
459:
444:
428:
408:
387:
378:
342:
330:
318:
306:
292:
283:
258:
242:
230:
218:
205:
196:
187:
175:
155:
134:
371:
as anti-whaling propaganda..... but seriously, it's very nice, but too grainy, blown out highlighsts, and overly dull in some areas.
694:
closeup pictures available of it, copyrighted or not; this photo was taken by one of the leading scientists studying these animals.
266:- I hate to say "you missed a spot", but there's still a big hair in the lower right and a small hair on the belly of the mother.
510:
Blurry, and the colors somehow don't feel right. Something with the white balance, or the off-white orca with the whiter snow.--
226:
The entire picture seems to be slightly out of focus. It's a nice scene, but it isn't enough to convince me to support it. --
214:
One more edit: I cropped the discolored border and did some color correction. I agree with Fcb's sentiment on the subject. ~
537:
Edit 3 improved the color a little, but there's still the band of blurry snow and another could always be taken. I now
579:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured_picture_candidates#What_to_do_with_an_improved_version_of_an_almost-closed_candidate.3F
397:
anti-whaling propaganda? Its displaying the social interaction of the mother and the calf, its a zoological picture.
739:
361:
683:
471:
496:
I assume that's the new option that Kla'quot wanted me to know about. It's as good or better than edit 2.
353:
717:
695:
545:
514:
497:
485:
425:
375:
215:
74:
656:
652:
639:
602:
598:
327:
151:
147:
680:
468:
277:
255:
303:
631:
619:
315:
239:
550:
542:
519:
511:
422:
372:
167:
and blur prevent me from supporting. I also agree that an edit would improve the sides. --
164:
577:
Edit 3 just came in and procedurally I don't know what to do with it. My question at See
703:
648:
594:
582:
529:
439:
434:
403:
398:
339:
193:
143:
131:
120:
614:- edit 3 is nice, but it's still a very low quality image. And it doesn't add much to
752:
735:
269:
251:
49:
163:. I'll give it credit for being a neat shot, but the technical aspects, such as the
456:
227:
484:
The others don't look so great. With proper clarity, it is a compelling image.
384:
289:
202:
184:
61:
566:
675:
671:
169:
69:
80:
33:
730:
97:
45:
54:
581:
hasn't been answered yet, so I'm taking a guess and putting it here.
383:
just as a comment, its hard to prevent blowing highlights on snow. -
699:
84:
Edit 3 by MIckStephenson on March 28. Downsampled, colour improved
615:
106:
93:
40:
65:
Edit1, fringing on sides, noise reduction, colors, etc. -Fcb981
250:, looks sharp enough to me, very good encyclopedic picture --
92:
This gorgeous picture illustrates two important themes of the
142:, blurry, weak color and poor image quality in general.
729:(9 support / 2 weak support / 6 oppose / 1 neutral) --
73:
Edit 2, cropped, color corrected, noise reduction ~
302:its a great action shot, and very encyclopedic-
8:
593:, Image quality just isn't up to standards.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Featured picture candidates
351:
79:
68:
60:
32:
769:Featured picture nominations/March 2007
161:Neutral for all, preference for Edit 3
698:and all the more poignant because we
7:
759:Ended featured picture nominations
24:
103:Articles this image appears in
1:
618:that the other photos don't.
192:I love the edit. Thank you!!
764:Featured picture nominations
700:just lost a cetacean species
28:Killer whale mother and calf
433:Oh i see, never mind then.
785:
721:07:47, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
707:04:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
689:15:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
661:14:16, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
643:08:24, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
623:06:52, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
607:06:22, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
586:17:10, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
570:12:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
554:23:22, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
533:05:16, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
523:23:35, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
501:06:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
489:00:26, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
477:23:07, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
460:11:18, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
445:10:50, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
429:01:12, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
409:00:38, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
388:22:49, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
379:21:22, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
343:04:46, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
331:08:48, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
319:00:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
307:20:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
293:03:46, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
284:16:08, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
259:11:13, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
243:09:07, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
231:07:37, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
219:07:13, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
206:03:48, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
197:07:07, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
188:06:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
176:03:33, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
156:03:05, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
135:02:52, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
745:11:03, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
634:point 1, paragraph 2 and
714:Weak support my own edit
563:Support Edit1 and Edit 2
44:(Killer Whales) in the
85:
77:
66:
58:
201:My pleasure. thanks -
83:
72:
64:
36:
494:Also support edit 3.
565:A striking image --
541:oppose the image.--
482:Support edit 2 only
86:
78:
67:
59:
743:
365:
356:comment added by
281:
776:
733:
686:
668:Still oppose all
474:
442:
437:
406:
401:
282:
275:
272:
240:Adrian Pingstone
224:Oppose all edits
172:
114:Robert L. Pitman
784:
783:
779:
778:
777:
775:
774:
773:
749:
748:
718:trialsanderrors
684:
472:
440:
435:
404:
399:
324:Neutral/comment
270:
267:
216:trialsanderrors
170:
165:purple fringing
75:trialsanderrors
31:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
782:
780:
772:
771:
766:
761:
751:
750:
727:Not promoted
724:
723:
711:
710:
709:
665:
664:
663:
625:
609:
588:
572:
560:
559:
558:
557:
556:
505:
504:
503:
479:
462:
451:
450:
449:
448:
447:
413:It's a joke.
392:
391:
390:
366:
358:76.176.114.213
345:
333:
321:
309:
297:
296:
295:
261:
245:
233:
221:
212:
211:
210:
209:
208:
181:Support Edit 1
178:
158:
137:
124:
123:
118:
115:
112:
109:
104:
101:
90:
30:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
781:
770:
767:
765:
762:
760:
757:
756:
754:
747:
746:
741:
737:
732:
728:
722:
719:
715:
712:
708:
705:
701:
696:
692:
691:
690:
687:
682:
677:
673:
669:
666:
662:
658:
654:
650:
646:
645:
644:
641:
637:
633:
629:
626:
624:
621:
617:
613:
610:
608:
604:
600:
596:
592:
589:
587:
584:
580:
576:
573:
571:
568:
564:
561:
555:
552:
549:
548:
544:
540:
536:
535:
534:
531:
526:
525:
524:
521:
518:
517:
513:
509:
506:
502:
499:
495:
492:
491:
490:
487:
483:
480:
478:
475:
470:
466:
463:
461:
458:
455:
452:
446:
443:
438:
432:
431:
430:
427:
424:
420:
416:
412:
411:
410:
407:
402:
396:
393:
389:
386:
382:
381:
380:
377:
374:
370:
367:
363:
359:
355:
349:
346:
344:
341:
337:
334:
332:
329:
325:
322:
320:
317:
313:
310:
308:
305:
301:
298:
294:
291:
287:
286:
285:
279:
274:
273:
265:
262:
260:
257:
253:
249:
246:
244:
241:
237:
234:
232:
229:
225:
222:
220:
217:
213:
207:
204:
200:
199:
198:
195:
191:
190:
189:
186:
182:
179:
177:
174:
173:
166:
162:
159:
157:
153:
149:
145:
141:
138:
136:
133:
129:
126:
125:
122:
119:
116:
113:
110:
108:
105:
102:
99:
95:
91:
88:
87:
82:
76:
71:
63:
56:
51:
47:
43:
42:
35:
29:
26:
19:
726:
725:
713:
667:
635:
627:
611:
590:
574:
562:
546:
538:
515:
507:
493:
481:
465:(Oppose all)
464:
453:
394:
368:
352:— Preceding
347:
335:
323:
311:
299:
268:
263:
247:
235:
223:
180:
168:
160:
139:
127:
38:
27:
454:Support All
753:Categories
498:YechielMan
486:YechielMan
37:A pair of
676:Thylacine
672:Great auk
649:Night Gyr
595:Night Gyr
238:Blurry -
144:Night Gyr
117:Nominator
740:contribs
704:Kla'quot
612:Still no
591:Still No
583:Kla'quot
530:Kla'quot
441:hris_huh
419:this one
415:This nom
405:hris_huh
354:unsigned
340:Kla'quot
271:howcheng
252:Chris 73
194:Kla'quot
132:Kla'quot
121:Kla'quot
98:cetacean
46:Ross Sea
628:Support
620:Stevage
457:Tomer T
395:Support
348:Support
316:Stevage
300:Support
264:Comment
248:Support
228:Mad Max
128:Support
111:Creator
55:species
39:Type C
640:mikaul
632:WP:FP?
575:Update
539:weakly
508:Oppose
385:Fcb981
369:Oppose
336:Update
328:mikaul
312:Oppose
290:Fcb981
236:Oppose
203:Fcb981
185:Fcb981
140:Oppose
89:Reason
48:. The
674:or a
567:AGoon
551:oHelp
520:oHelp
304:Nelro
50:bond
41:Orcas
16:<
736:talk
653:talk
636:then
616:Orca
599:talk
543:Here
512:Here
423:gren
417:and
373:gren
362:talk
278:chat
256:Talk
171:Tewy
148:talk
107:Orca
94:Orca
731:KFP
681:YFB
469:YFB
426:グレン
376:グレン
755::
738:|
679:--
659:)
657:Oy
605:)
603:Oy
364:)
254:|
154:)
152:Oy
130:—
742:)
734:(
685:¿
655:/
651:(
601:/
597:(
547:T
516:T
473:¿
436:C
400:C
360:(
280:}
276:{
150:/
146:(
57:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
