Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Coryphistes ruricola03.jpg

Coryphistes ruricola
Series of high quality images of the Bark Mimicking Grasshopper, Coryphistes ruricola. Found him near a river bank in Swifts Creek, in January 2007. Specimen approx 60mm in length. Rocks used for Alternative 1 were collected near where specimen was found and are the likely cause of his colouration.

MER-C 03:45, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Self Nom. --Fir0002 08:00, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Support the nominated image. Would support Alternative 1 if it were used in any articles.  Spikebrennan 13:06, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Support lol: One or the other. I must say I admire your solution to constant criticism about which background you should be using.  However, you need to make a page for Coryphistes ruricola, link it appropriately from other grasshopper pages, and put all three images in its gallery.  I think I like alternative 1 best because I can see the blue spots on the inside of the jumping leg.  You should avoid speculation in your description of the rocks and the grasshopper's coloration, though.   Enuja 17:13, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Support the camouflage one. Nice demonstration of evolution too.--Svetovid 12:23, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Original nom with white background or Alt 1. Another great photo Fir. but make it easy for us and number ALL the alternatives next time ;-) ~ Veledan • Talk 21:50, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Support only edit 1 or 2 Schcambo 11:01, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Support 2 - I think the enc value is higher when it is placed in context of its likely habitat to show why it has its markings. Version 1 actually may be a more useful picture for many purposes, because it would be easy to place on a completely photoshopped background, but it is not as enc.  As I said about your spider picture, I would love a sense of scale here as well, either in a digitally inserted ruler or a modification to the caption that gives length.  Note: I'm going to say thing repeatedly, considering your body of work - it's not a criticism of the work as a whole (which is excellent) but a suggestion to add enc value to great macro shots.  I am going to briefly write my thoughts in detail on your talk page, since they are broader than this picture.   Zakolantern 22:35, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * To clarify, you're supporting "Alternative 1", not "Alternative 2", correct? &mdash; BRIAN 0918 &bull; 2007-07-06 15:43Z
 * I am supporting the middle of the three images, captioned Alternative 1, with a granite looking rock background. Zakolantern 22:48, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Alternative 1 Better DOF than white bg; more enc because it shows camouflage. —BrOnXbOmBr21 • talk • contribs • 08:41, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Alternative 1. Encyclopedic value of showing the camouflage trumps all. Given that image, the other choices make no sense. &mdash; BRIAN 0918 &bull; 2007-07-06 15:41Z
 * Support Alternative 1 Illustrates the camouflage nicely. -- snowolf D4  (  talk  /  @   ) 00:23, 9 July 2007 (UTC)