Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Grasshopper defecating collage 01 (MK).jpg

File:Grasshopper defecating collage 01 (MK).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2010 at 15:02:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Grasshopper shitting collage 01 (MK).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Grasshopper shitting collage 01 (MK).jpg

•  Info c/u/n by -- mathias K 15:02, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Now again my first try with the new guidelines. ;-) This is a collage of 6 pictures showing a ~10mm large grasshopper nymph shitting. The whole process takes not even a minute and I was really lucky seeing and taking pics of it cause me plan was only 1 pic of this nymph. I think this is a really interesting pic with a nice quality showing a very rare a scene. -- mathias K 15:02, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment Imo a bit overexposured --Mbdortmund (talk) 15:17, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

• Can't see oe. I've chosen this exposure cause so the details on the hopper are still visible. Except the first one where the sun was shining imo the exposure is OK. --mathias K 16:51, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

•  Comment The grasshopper on the two last images is out of focus. --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 16:43, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

• No he is in focus. This is motion blur. --mathias K 16:51, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

• His head in the last two images is clearly out-of-focus, since his back legs are perfectly in-focus. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 18:12, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

• Hm yes, OK his head is oof. But at this picture I don't want to focus clearly on the eyes as usual. Cause that what he is doing has nothing to do with his head... And so focus on the back legs seems OK for me. --mathias K 18:54, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

•  Support Great capture, funny, informative and I suspect the only one of a grasshopper defecating... Congrats! --Tomascastelazo (talk) 19:23, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
•  Support We don't have nearly enough featured photographs of insects taking dumps. ~Kevin Payravi (Talk) 20:07, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment Great picture series, shame about the filename, please consider putting in a rename request to the more scientific "defecating". --99of9 (talk) 01:39, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

• Yes, your right, "defecating" sounds much better. I've added {{rename}}. Thanks for the advice. --mathias K 11:48, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

•  Done Renamed per your request. --99of9 (talk) 12:10, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks a lot! Should now the nomination also be renamed or is this not necessary? bg mathias K 12:25, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

•  Oppose Also, the first frame appears to have different colour settings and magnification, can this be corrected? --99of9 (talk) 07:14, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

• No, sadly the colour settings can't be corrected cause only at the first pic was direct sunlight. After shooting the first pic he starts to defecate and then the sun was behind a cloud. The magnification can be corrected if it is wished. --mathias K 11:48, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

•  Support --The High Fin Sperm Whale 17:13, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
•  Support - Such captures are hard to get, and to maintain such an extremely high level of technical quality is almost not possible. I feel the "wow" factor out-ways some its lackings. Tiptoety ^talk 06:28, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose No wow for me. Moreover quality is dearly lacking (focus mostly). Then there are the almost duplicate frames: I see only four really different frames (1=6 and 3=4), why then featuring six? Lycaon (talk) 10:34, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Well, from the grasshopper's point of view, I believe that 1 ≠ 6... namely, if we use m to denote the mass of the grasshopper, we hopefully have m ₆ < m ₁. --MAURILBERT (discuter) 02:05, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Very good capture but the quality isn't exzellent (exposure, dof etc.), sorry. I share the same opinion that four frames would be enough.   &#x95; Richard &#x95; [®] &#x95; 11:02, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
•  Support--MZaplotnik ^{(my contribs)} 18:49, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Richard --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 20:15, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose -- Poor quality, one picture would be enough to show the happening. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 00:02, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:43, 10 July 2010 (UTC)