Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Purple Swamphen - Pukeko02.jpg

< Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates

Pukeko

edit
 
Original - A Pukeko, a subspecies of Purple Swamphens
 
Adjusted white balance
 
Alt 1


Reason
High quality bird photo
Articles this image appears in
Pukeko
Creator
Fir0002
Mainly off-topic discussion on WP:NZ
  • It doesn't need a re-write, it needs merging into the species article (see my original discussion here, I had other things to do and forgot to push it). The Oz/NZ subspecies is not distinctive enough to merit its own article. But that is a matter for another page. This image would be suitable for the main article on the species, Purple Swamphen. Sabine's Sunbird talk 01:09, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • @ Noodle snacks: Like most of these articles, the only reason they have a NZ bias is because they are were written about the NZ occurrence of the species, and were usually written before anyone else bothered to write an article about the more general occurrence of the species. So don't be sick about someone having bothered to write an article, be sick about no one being interested enough to generalise it to occurrences elsewhere. --Tony Wills (talk) 02:59, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • I'd argue it is actually easier to write a generalist article. To quote the article creator: "I created it because ... as a New Zealander, I looked up pukeko and got overloaded with info about purple swamphens from other countries". Noodle snacks (talk) 07:15, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The contrast between the bird and background gives it an almost cut-out appearance and the white balance is way off (too red). But I really like the alt1 version, but think you need a tighter crop if you want to use it in the info box on the article page (I don't think the Aussy version is a different, or substantially different, sub-species, so it is perfectly fine for the article page) --Tony Wills (talk) 12:41, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I thought the auto-white balance correction was too much, so manually adjusted it slightly. --Tony Wills (talk) 04:22, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The alt seems to be the only one with realistic colours in my experiance with the bird. It is called a Purple Swamphen, not a blue one. I'd like to see the original with the colour balance of the alt. Noodle snacks (talk) 07:16, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
!? "The translation from the Greek means 'purple black', though they are more blue than purple"[1] --Tony Wills (talk) 09:00, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am saying the alternate has the most realistic colour based on personal observation of this species. Noodle snacks (talk) 09:03, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've overwritten the original with an edit which has the exact WB of the alternative - the difference was extremely slim (4850 vs 4700, +12 tint vs +13 tint) as I expected. Not that fussed but the edit is somewhat inaccurate because the background reeds are not a bright green but are a mixture of dying (yellow/brown) and green reeds. So IMO the original is more accurate --Fir0002 10:41, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I realise in the 'original' the bird is larger, but what detail differences do you mean? I see the Alt1 as a superb illustration of the bird in its natural habitat, right down to the turned head and alert look (whereas the 'original' has the look of a cow daydreaming while chewing on its cud ;-). --Tony Wills (talk) 12:56, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Before it could be eligible for promotion to FP, Alt 1 would have to actually be in use in the article, and it isn't. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 13:07, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Used in Purple Swamphen --Tony Wills (talk) 20:55, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Purple Swamphen - Pukeko02.jpg --wadester16 16:14, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Purple_Swamphen_-_Pukeko02.jpg&oldid=303359529"