Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Cicindela hybrida 3 Richard Bartz.jpg

Image:Cicindela hybrida claws Richard Bartz.jpg

•  Info created & nominated by --Richard Bartz 20:04, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Info The tiger beetles are a large group of beetles known for their predatory habits. As shown a Sandlaufkäfer 'Cicindela hybrida' which is 12mm in size. The Frons (forehead) and the claws are a very important part to identify many species, so i did a 4x magnification which is very difficult to produce. This picture illustrates this article in a very professional manner.
•  Info Uploaded the more detailed highres version --Richard Bartz 22:14, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Fantastic 4:1 Macro! --Richard Bartz 20:04, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Very good Lycaon 20:23, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Excellent 4:1 closeup of an interesting subject. Just one question: why is it known as a Sandlaufkäfer if you found it in a greener (sorry, I don't know the technical term for macro :) ) surrounding? Freedom to share 20:32, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Comment Iam not a Entomologist, but i think (based on watching) they left the cold ground when there is foul weather. They also have wings which they can use to reach leaves and rocks. Here in munich we dont have a beach but some smal spaces close to the river with washed up sediments but this is not enough space i think --Richard Bartz 20:59, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Support -- MJJR 21:24, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose -- The head which is the focus is not completely in focus. Probably not that easy to do with macro, but then again there are plenty of bugs in FP so it might be time to raise the standards. Dori | Talk 21:49, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Support I agree, there are many bugs in FP, but few of such a high magnification, so IMO the standard is raised by this photo already. Wow. -- Slaunger 22:09, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose - The standards have already been raised. In this case I don't like the composition, which is a fundamental parameter in evaluating the candidates (in particular the cropped front leg). Very big or very detailed doens't mean always beautiful or special enough. - Alvesgaspar 23:21, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose I dont like the composition either --Simonizer 09:09, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Acceptable beacause of hard subject. --Beyond silence 17:04, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose Composition and framing. --Digon3 ^talk 19:06, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose framing and cropping Tbc 11:37, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
  
•  Support --Karelj 21:12, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Support I think composition is nice given the part of the subject which is emphasized. This picture is amazingly detailed and I wonder how one can achieve a 4:1 magnification. Benh 16:20, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

result: 8 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 14:44, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Version 2, featured

•  Info created & nominated by --Richard Bartz 20:23, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Info Iam very disapointed about the progress on this picture above, but . . . I dont give up :) I strongly believe that the head with the claws mighty jaws are the most interesting element on this insect. Shots like this on a insect with 10mm or less than half an inch in size, taken biaswise are the most difficult things in macro photography. Did you knew that in the strict sense macro photography starts with a magnification greater than 1:1? If any User find a similar picture (with the same image-resolution, insect-size and magnification) i will tell this user all my evil and mean macro-freak hints per email :) PS. Find that picture on Commons --Richard Bartz 20:48, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Fantastic 3:1 Macro! --Richard Bartz 20:23, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Support First the bad news: They are jaws, not claws. Then the better news: the picture is even better than the one above !!. (ehh, BTW (look here) -- Lycaon 20:39, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

No! On Commons! :) --Richard Bartz 20:47, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

•  Support Better. --Digon3 ^talk 20:52, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Support The sand is almost as interesting as the insect itself. :) Freedom to share 21:01, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Yes, definitely better. Dori | Talk 21:27, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Very good indeed. --MichaelMaggs 21:28, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Excellent! -- Slaunger 21:30, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Support -- MJJR 19:20, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Great detail! -- (Relic38 03:46, 12 September 2007 (UTC))
•  Support -- Benh 16:22, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Support--Mbz1 18:50, 15 September 2007 (UTC)Mbz1
•  Support --Chrumps 13:45, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer 15:03, 20 September 2007 (UTC)