Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Wurzacher Ried (NSG Nr. 4.035), Frühe Adonisjungfern bei der Eiablage.jpg

[[:File:Wurzacher Ried (NSG Nr. 4.035), Frühe Adonisjungfern bei der Eiablage.jpg], not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2017 at 17:00:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Odonata#Family_:_Coenagrionidae_.28Narrow-winged_damselflies.29
Info created, uploaded and nominated by AWeith -- AWeith (talk) 17:00, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment No need to travel far for exciting wildlife! The moor of the Wurzacher Ried is in bicycle distance from my home and provides a plethora of scenarios. This was a particularly well lit place and crowded with damselflies.
Oppose Unfortunataly, they are all blurred. Charles (talk) 19:05, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. Excellent and would be really useful as a VI, but not an FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:26, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support The two pairs on left are in focus. The flying pair on right make the place very dynamic. I don't think it is possible to get all in focus in such an event. J e e 02:42, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I've decided to change my vote, because Jee is right. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:15, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No. none of the pairs are in focus - and 1/200 sec makes that impossible. Charles (talk) 09:30, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose it's only the female (the bottom one) from two pairs that's pretty well in focus. But I generally agree with Jee and cart's viewpoints. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:40, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Not only per Charles, but the composition is rather chaotic, making it hard for the subject to stand out from the background. A VI likely, but not an FP. Daniel Case (talk) 15:31, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support - excellent capture of a very chaotic event performed by the very skittish. Atsme 📞 03:18, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support A bit messy, but making new life is a messy business and how often do we see this many pairs of these critters in one photo. The red also makes them stand out sufficiently from the background. --cart-Talk 06:15, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Common picture - no wow. And I don't see a sharp dragonfly. --Hockei (talk) 14:41, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination I really must admit that I am utterly surprised. It is hard for me to understand how this image can be described as "Common picture"; despite my personal disappointment this is certainly beyond sheer ignorance, @Hockei: . I may agree to the criticism that the image would suffer from some lack of sharpness, which is debatable. It was – as I described – taken in a swamp under adventurous circumstances (not easy to catch twelve ticklish damselflies all at once; who of you wildlife photographers achieved that before?) that is why it looks somewhat „chaotic“ . Sometimes you have to accept that Nature comprises chaos, @Daniel Case: !. And that is exactly what I value regarding this picture. I am, in general, very astonished about the judgement and the respective arguments in an increasing number of instances here at FPC and I am questioning myself whether I should continue contributing. Sorry to hold you up but I cannot hold my temper any more at this point. Cheers --AWeith (talk) 21:33, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AWeith, I understand your disappointment as you were a biologist by profession. I'm just an enthusiast but have good experience due to the rich diversity of odonata near my home. I had photographed them ovipositing in heavy monsoon when the streams are very wild (1, 2, 3). Some of them, especially the species who prefer fast flowing water streams are very difficult to capture. The water is flowing and the floating plant is also moving along with the waves. The damselflies are busy serching for the best sites, having the ability to spend more than fifteen minutes under water. And I too in the water upto my neck to get an inline view. I lost one camera during such an expedition!

But we must understand that FPC is not a place where we can expect review by subject experts. He we have photography experts and they may not always able to understand the value of a particular moment in biology. That's why I try to explain things in the nomination and file description as much as possible. It works sometimes. Sometimes I too get disappointed. I had disappointed a lot in my early days here; but now I know I can't expect too much in FPC which makes me feel better.

Hope you too can understand this, control your temper, and enjoy FPC as it is. Please take it light and keep contributing! J e e 03:56, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your frustration, but that's FPC. Always mostly genuine votes, some ill-informed (pro or con) and a few revenge opposes. I have taken many similar images, but all are blurred like yours. Multiple ovipositing is very common, but inherently impossible to get right as you need high speed and high Depth of Field and cameras can't do that. Using 1/200 sec on a 600mm lens must have been on a tripod, but you're never going to get sharpness. The best you can hope for is perhaps two pairs in focus then it might work, but none of yours have been captured sharp. Charles (talk) 11:14, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AWeith, I cannot count how often I tried to get a picture like this in a good or for me acceptable quality. I didn't made it. I'm not sure if I kept one of these hundreds of throw away pictures. To get such a picture in world class quality and composition is hardly possible. Charles said it. So don't be angry but rather be honest to yourself. It has nothing to do with biological worth. --Hockei (talk) 15:37, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--cart-Talk 17:26, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]