In this article, we will explore and analyze Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Pipistrellustufacave.jpg in depth. From its history to its impact on today's society, we will dive into all the relevant aspects related to this topic. With a multifaceted approach, we will address everything from historical and cultural perspectives to contemporary discussions and future projections. Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Pipistrellustufacave.jpg is a topic that has captured the attention of many and has sparked debates and reflections in various areas. Join us on this journey of discovery and understanding of Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Pipistrellustufacave.jpg.
File:Pipistrellustufacave.jpgOriginal - A Pipistrellus bat recovering after landing on a pavement in daylight. (It has now been rehabilitated!) I took a couple of pics with a macro lens - very noisy - but couldn't reduce noise too much as pic went soft. This is an extremely rare shot.
Reason
Extremely rare to photograph this wild bat during the day. This has been resized to make it over the required 1,000 pixels, following earlier comments.
Question. Can you explain why this picture is "extremely rare". I see bats sleeping in parking garages during the day all the time here in the States. I haven't taken any pictures as I assumed such pictures would be quite common. Kaldari (talk) 17:32, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Like I give a shit about what you see everyday... The good old US of A obviously has everything fine and dandy - except a brain.
I imagine our advantage is that every American city is filled with block upon block of parking garages, which seem to be favored sleeping spots for bats. Kaldari (talk) 23:10, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Strong oppose, speedy close Resizing a small, fuzzy photo to get it to 1000px or more is a no-no here at FPC - the original must be sharp, this is not... --Janke | Talk17:45, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Small fuzzy picture? Ta you tosser. Like to see YOU get a better one!
Oppose - since my last objection on size grounds, this looks like it's just been upsampled from the small version, and therefore the quality is nothing near FP-worthy. You cannot just expand a picture and expect it to stay sharp or good quality - you can't get back information that's not already there. You need to go back to the original image that came out of the camera, before any editing or cropping or adjustments, and upload that for us to see. It's possible I may be wrong and this is the image from the camera, in which case it's still too low quality. EDIT: Basically, per Janke. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ17:59, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose as per comments above. The picture is definitely too noisy. Try to get a closer shot with a good camera with the original resolution above 1000px. Luca (talk) 19:51, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, the next time I'm skipping along and happen on a bat, I'll whip out my 40D, complete with £4,000 Macro lens, and grab a shot. Get real, you don't trip over bats every day!!!
Dear all. You lot at Featured Pictures are the snottiest bunch of twats I have EVER come across! So this is a "small fuzzy picture"? I'd LOVE to see any of you lot get a picture of a bat in broad daylight in England! (I don't give a stuff about them being 'oh so common' in the States - any country which votes in George Bush is a complete joke anyway- but it is extremely rare to see them in the daytime here) .PS Fuck off!!
