Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Calopteryx virgo male.jpg

Calopteryx virgo

 * Reason:Amazing picture and high resolution.
 * Articles this image appears in:Beautiful Demoiselle
 * Creator:User:MichaD


 * Support as nominator &mdash; Bewareofdog 06:46, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Support: Great snap with amazing clarity. But the front leg seems cut (at the extreme edge). If not, i shall change the vote to SUPPORT. --Kalyan 09:24, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Has the head (eye, specifically) been selectively masked and sharpened? It looks as if the eye edges should be out of focus, given the camera orientation and the surrounding detail. It wouldn't put me off, particularly, but I would like to know before I vote. mikaultalk 10:23, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 *  Support either  - Wow, the thumb really doesn't do this image justice. The abdomen section alone would get my support; it's magnificent!  --198.178.232.2 12:49, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, you have to be logged in to vote. mikaultalk 15:25, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Support original - Oops; that was me, but now I've changed my vote. --TotoBaggins 22:02, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

MER-C 05:22, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose edit. It suggests that the leg is shorter than it really is. Wrong information is even worse than obviously missing info. --Dschwen 12:55, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Question What exactly was done to the edit? A very slight unsharp mask or other sharpening tool?  I can't tell.  Thanks.  But Dschwen - I am trying to figure out what you're referring to and failing.  Explain?  I will support one of the two after a reply.  Zakolantern 17:05, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the self-reply. It appears that ~10 pixels were added to the right side of the image, making it appear that leg naturally ended and the green started again.  Is this true?  Zakolantern 17:08, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Support original Another superb pic. Cut foot doesn't bother me, it's outside the focus anyway and doesn't spoil the composition. But don't edit it.~ Veledan • Talk 17:19, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong support original An amazing shot; I haven't seen a photograph like this for quite some time now. The cut-off foot is of secondary concern. Chris Buttigieg 09:29, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Support original, oppose edit Beautifully detailed! But it's misleading to pretend the leg ends at the edge of the picture. Adam Cuerden talk 12:29, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Support - The original of these two options, however I think I like the VERY slight bit of sharpening in the alternate (and like everyone else don't like the fake foot). Zakolantern 16:51, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment It seems some people have inadvertently confessed to failing to follow guidelines and vote on the full size image. I applied no sharpening whatsoever, the sharpness you see is only on the image description page because it has been uploaded after the new software on the commons was set to apply a mild unsharp on image description pages. Make sure to view all images at full size before voting! --Fir0002 09:03, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Right! But it doesn't hurt to purge the old thumbnail (add ?action=purge to the imagepage URL and force a reload). --Dschwen 12:45, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I did look at both images at full size (if you're talking about someone in particular, you might as well be honest and name them...me) I gave a pretty detailed comment for that matter.  Additionally -  a pair of questions - could you link me to where it describes that software feature, and explain why (I believe there is a reason, I just don't know it) I might have noticed a hint of sharpness in the alt but not the original?  Thanks. Zakolantern 16:26, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Support - another great image from fir0002. I'm really not fussed about cut-off legs, you guys obviously just needed something to be picky about :) Stevage 01:33, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Support - This is beautiful. By the way: Stevage, give credit where credit is due.  This picture was taken by Michael Apel! :o)   tiZom(2¢)  03:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Original What a wonderfully detailed image! Subject is perfectly illustrated IMHO and background is complimentary and non distracting. aliasd·U·T 09:44, 15 July 2007 (UTC)