Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/BeadedLizard-AHPExotics.jpg

Beaded Lizard
This image appears in the article Beaded Lizard and you won't find a more detailed picture of one anywhere. Which is why I'm nominating it.

That was a total accident that I meant to fix, but left undone in tiredness. The copy had an improper name, so I uploaded a new copy. The old copy will needs to be replaced and deleted, and I'm doing that right now.PiccoloNamek 08:43, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Nominate and support. - PiccoloNamek 02:20, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
 * That picture isn't in an article, but a copy of it is. What's up with that? Why do we need both? Broken S 05:42, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
 * No contrast in the snout region (too dark). There is not even half a lizzard on this picture. The way it is dodged into the sand on this picture gives the the reader no impression for the figure of this critter. I would have a very hard time recognizing one in real life from this picture. --Dschwen 17:28, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

The snout looks fine to me. Perhaps your monitor is too dark. I had the exact same problem with the Flower Fly nomination. Some people thought it was too light, others too dark, and some liked it the way it was. Anyway, as for the half a lizard comment, the lizard itself is so distinctive looking, it would be very difficult indeed to mistake it for anything else, even if the picture was nothing but a head. The only other lizard that looks remotely like this one is the Gila Monster, which has a very different looking face.PiccoloNamek 17:55, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Picolo - I agree with Dschwen that the snout was too dark.. It is difficult to see the detail. Unfortunately though, that is the problem with using a computer to display photos - nobody sees things exactly the same the way you do. I do have a pretty well calibrated monitor though, and it looks dark to me. The detail is there in the shadows but isn't very visible (some parts of the snout were only 3-6 steps from total black). I've created an edited copy that has the shadows brought out a little, revealing more detail that was difficult to see previously. The rest of the image is untouched. Hope you don't mind. I feel like I'm the edit fairy now with all the fixes I've made. :) Sorry! Diliff 09:37, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
 * No problem. I think it does look better. Nothing wrong with a little editing, I've done my fair share here as well. :)PiccoloNamek 01:37, 27 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Support whichever version. Very detailed and nice picture. Raven4x4x 23:43, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Support any version. Very impressive. Incidentally, why would it matter we see only half a lizard, the closeup on his head is very valuable for recognition. - Adrian Pingstone 21:44, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. Unique. Enochlau 10:40, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Support either version. —DO'&#1048;eil 07:54, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
 * ( + ) Support Original only. Good setting. --Fir0002 09:44, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Not intending to start anything Fir, but what objections do you have towards the edit? As I said in my orignal comments regarding the original, parts of the snout are only 3-6 steps from total black and that is not something that is likely to be seen with the naked eye (the naked eye has far more dynamic range than a camera has), so while I'm not saying that my edit is definitively better, I'm curious why you see it as being the better of the two. Do you think that a snout that is almost perceptibly black in parts is realistic and the more accurate for the article? Diliff 15:03, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Pretty much - I think the shadow/highlight (I'm assuming this is what you used) doesn't really work. It's all very well to get more detail - but to me the black snout looks more realistic - especially when you compare them side by side.--Fir0002 10:16, 31 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Support. My preference is obviously for the edit :) as I just think the snout is too dark in the original. Otherwise excellent photo. Diliff 15:04, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutral. Just lacking something...I dont know. Maybe I'd like it if it were the whole lizard.  --ScottyBoy900Q ∞  23:51, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

I'll go with the original as no-one has any major problems with it, while there is one definate oppose for the edit. Raven4x4x 08:34, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

