Support what a shot.
Hafspajen (
talk) 19:41, 17 November 2014 (UTC)reply
Support Very good timing and good shot. --
Slaunger (
talk) 20:39, 17 November 2014 (UTC)reply
Support - pretty cool shot!
///EuroCarGT 01:36, 18 November 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment - Beautiful photo of an owl landing but marred by the difficulty in understanding the gauntleted hand which at first sight looks like a fence post or stump.
Cwmhiraeth (
talk) 06:07, 18 November 2014 (UTC)reply
Weak Support I dislike such a tight shot. The nom is about the falconry (according to the title), not just about the owl, and as
Cwmhiraeth pointed out, it isn't immediately obvious what the owl is landing on due to such a tight shot. In addition (although not saying I could do better) a lot of the owl appears out of focus. If the framing was better I could look past that however.
gazhiley 10:33, 18 November 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment- I wouldn't call this a tight shot.
Hafspajen (
talk) 11:39, 18 November 2014 (UTC)reply
Each to their own... I do... I'd like to see the actual falconer in shot if this is a demonstration of falconry...
gazhiley 13:19, 18 November 2014 (UTC)reply
It's a compromise no matter how you look at it. The photographer can either shoot from a bit further back (or with a shorter lens) and lose detail in the bird and glove, or shot from close in and lose information on the falconer. I tend to fall on the "closer" side of that compromise, but I understand that not all people do (and to be honest I can't see the glove as anything other than a glove). —
Crisco 1492 (
talk) 15:24, 18 November 2014 (UTC)reply
Oh I agree it's a compromise. If this was nominated purely for the Owl, it'd be a full support all the way. However the nom is about falconry, and you can't see the falconer. Hence Weak Support.
gazhiley 15:28, 18 November 2014 (UTC)reply
Support - Nice detail and good EV for both articles.--
Godot13 (
talk) 08:45, 19 November 2014 (UTC)reply