Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Brilliant emerald (Somatochlora metallica) teneral female 3.jpg

File:Brilliant emerald (Somatochlora metallica) teneral female 3.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Oct 2018 at 10:25:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Brilliant emerald (Somatochlora metallica) teneral female 3.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Brilliant emerald (Somatochlora metallica) teneral female 3.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Odonata
•  Info The brilliant emerald is one of the UK's rarest dragonflies. It spends nearly all of its life in flight and so is extraordinarily difficult to photograph. Except for a period of 30 minutes. In late June/early July, a few will emerge together from dark woodland ponds and can be observed waiting for their wings to dry. Then they make their first short flight. If you're lucky, it's a nice day and one will land somewhere close in the open and you have 10-30 minutes photo-time. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 10:25, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
•  Support -- Charles (talk) 10:25, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
•  Comment - Thanks for the background. I'm feeling like I prefer File:Brilliant emerald (Somatochlora metallica) teneral female.jpg. Do you prefer this one mainly because more of the head is seen? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:48, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

• Yes, that's right. In fact I nominated File:Brilliant emerald (Somatochlora metallica) teneral female 2.jpg to VI because of the head/thorax, though the one you like is the better-looking image. Charles (talk) 15:48, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

• Thanks for explaining. Without the alternative, I think I'd support this nomination, but since I prefer the other photo a lot, I may abstain on this nom and will decide later. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:01, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

• a nomination of the other one is always possible I guess, though I've never nominated two pictures of the same specimen before. Charles (talk) 20:41, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

•  Support -- Colin (talk) 15:33, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
•  Support I'm not much for bug photos unless they have an artistic touch, and this one actually has. --Cart (talk) 15:52, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
•  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 16:03, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Cayambe (talk) 20:30, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
•  Support Subdued color works quite well. Daniel Case (talk) 03:27, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:45, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:32, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 16:06, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:44, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support Detail of the wings is great Poco² 18:01, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:08, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --99of9 (talk) 05:09, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:41, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 22:43, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
•  Oppose the image looks overprocessed - hdr --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 09:33, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

• Criticise but please don't guess S. DÉNIEL. No HDR. If you knew about wildlife photography, you would know that HDR techniques are seldom relevant - like when taking this hand-held image on a windy day in a clump of bushes in a forest where the only support possible was a monopod. Charles (talk) 10:14, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

• I vote against one of your photos and you attack all my votes. not very fairplay. not friendly. I don't say it's HDR but overloaded to be like hdr - you can don't like my choices but respect my opinion please. --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:03, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

•  Oppose Looks overprocessed and not natural per S. DÉNIEL. Not very sharp. WB too cold. If rare or not or always flying or not isn't a reason for FP but maybe for VI. --Hockei (talk) 18:10, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

• You should read the FP guidelines Hockei: A bad picture of a very difficult subject is a better picture than a good picture of an ordinary subject. A good picture of a difficult subject is an extraordinary photograph. Charles (talk) 20:23, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

You mistake difficult with seldom opportunity. ISO 1000 is too high and f/4.5 is too large so that the DOF isn't enough. Then you try to conceal the bad quality with Photoshop with this overprocessing and sell us the picture as a FP. Too bad that the supporters above do not recognize this. --Hockei (talk) 12:23, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

As a talented bug photographer you should not make such an elementary mistake in analysis. In low light there is no sensible alternative to high ISO and large aperture. The other possibility, using flash, is not good for dragonflies because of the reflection of the wings. And I do not misunderstand the meaning of difficult, having a good understanding of my native language. Charles (talk) 14:58, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

•  Oppose Very nice composition, but poor quality: badly posterized background spoils the impression. --A.Savin 18:56, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

• It's quite noisy because of the ISO 1000 A.Savin, but where's the posterization? Charles (talk) 20:18, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

• Probably it's due to strong NR, but I don't think it makes the problem any lesser. Also, see Hockei. --A.Savin 14:59, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

•  Support --Tozina (talk) 06:04, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Basile Morin (talk) 06:36, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Odonata