Original - Eriophora heroine or Eriophora pustuosa
Reason
Best image in the article. Subject is tiny (this is > 2:1). Fir's image in the article has the wrong ID (I've told him about it). Can't tell the two possible species apart from the photograph.
Comment Actually I'm relatively confident in the ID - it was done by Martyn Robinson a naturalist at the Australian Museum. Whey do you say it is so small? If your talking about this site then I think you'd need to bear in mind it says "body" length - the length of the legs is several times that of the body. Compare their estimate of a huntsman - I regularly see specimens of about 8cm leg span and occasionally even larger. --Fir0002 12:40, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh and Weak Oppose Nice lighting but poor sharpness. Either find a larger specimen or get an MPE :) --Fir0002 12:40, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have an MP-E? The depth of field is just shallow, makes no difference between it and the tamron 180mm sharpness wise. The body length is up to 6-7mm, as various websites specify. Noodle snacks (talk) 06:45, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose it's not entirely in focus. Looks like your DOF is too shallow. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 16:16, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is easy to take a shot of a 6cm long damsel fly with most of it in focus. It isn't technically possible for a live, moving, subject closer to 1cm long. The same standards should not be applied. Noodle snacks (talk) 00:19, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support A well-lit, nicely composed shot that's just short of full support. I can't help thinking we're getting way too hung up on techincal issues here at FPC. Whatever happened to striking and eye-catching as valid support criteria? I'm only "weak" on this one due to the slightly overpowering key lighting from the left that's knocked it slightly out of balance, but I do find this approach much more compelling than basic technical correctness. --mikaultalk 00:58, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose left corner lighting, sharpness and DOF. --Muhammad(talk) 17:20, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not promoted --jjron (talk) 14:00, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
