Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Female Tetraloniella sp.jpg

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Female Tetraloniella sp[edit]

Original - A female bee Tetraloniella sp. Eucerini bee with its tongue extended to take in water or aphid secretions. Pictured in Kibaha, Tanzania.
Edit 1 - Cropped and scale moved
Edit 2 - suggested white balance. If you push it much further than this, you end up bleaching out the colors from the bee.
Reason
Good lighting, details and EV. Compared to the previous lead image, IMO the quality of this is outstanding. I maintained a loose crop to show the environment and to show that the bee is a solitary one.
Articles this image appears in
Apinae, Eucerini
Creator
Muhammad
  • Support as nominator --Muhammad(talk) 18:13, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question Is it possible to clone out that distracting streak at the top of its body? ZooFari 20:07, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes it's possible but I didn't find it distracting. If there is preference for an edited version, I don't mind uploading one --Muhammad(talk) 21:15, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Naa, I could live with it :-) ZooFari 07:03, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - looks great. Would get rid of the scale though for the FP. Not sure what "streak" zoofari is talking about - the little speck of dirt? Doesn't bother me. Stevage 03:27, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • To be fair, Muhammad has started adding the scale at the request of various people here. I guess you can't please everyone, but a scale does certainly help the EV, even if it detracts from the aesthetics. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 06:55, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • I support the use of scale (see current talk on discussion page), however for this particular image, the scale should be on the bottom-left (or bottom-right). The bee is looking toward the upper-right corner. Therefore our eyes are drawn there, and right now they see a distracting scale. Ksempac (talk) 10:00, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, but the colour balance seems very warm. Do you shoot in RAW Muhammad? Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 07:00, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Also, I think the composition could be improved by cropping it just to the right of the foreground leaf and moving the scale to the above-left of the bee. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 07:02, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • I had manually adjusted the colour balance during processing to what I remembered to be the right one. Uploaded edit which I hope fixes the points you raised. I shoot raw sometimes but this time I didn't. Is the scale and balance ok now?
        • I don't see a big difference in the colour balance (I would have made it slightly cooler but then again it seems to look much better than last time I saw it for some reason!) and the crop is much better now IMO. :-) Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 22:09, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support and Ksempac made a good point. Maybe the scale would be better on the bottom. ZooFari 17:07, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'd suggest the scales pretty much always look better at the bottom. --jjron (talk) 06:50, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Uploaded edit 1 Adjustments made: crop, colour balance, and scale moved. After the crop, little space was left at the bottom so I have just moved it to the left where it can be easily cloned out for those who don't want it.--Muhammad(talk) 19:36, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support any--Mbz1 (talk) 21:42, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support either. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 23:51, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Isn't the WB a bit yellow on this one too? Noodle snacks (talk) 07:57, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • See Diliff's comment above. I'm uploading a suggestion. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 08:28, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Quite likely (re comment on edit caption); colour balance problems are not always resolvable. --jjron (talk) 07:30, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Female Tetraloniella sp edit1.jpg When available, a cropped/zoomed copy is preferable. --wadester16 05:08, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]