Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Pracht Passionsfalter, Philaethria dido 1.JPG

File:Pracht Passionsfalter, Philaethria dido 1.JPG, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Aug 2011 at 19:28:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Pracht Passionsfalter, Philaethria dido 1.JPG Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Pracht Passionsfalter, Philaethria dido 1.JPG

•  Info Pracht Passionsfalter, Philaethria dido; all by -- Böhringer (talk) 19:28, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
•  Support -- Böhringer (talk) 19:28, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
•  Comment Good, although I would recommend slightly softening to get rid of the noise in the image. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 01:22, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
•  Oppose As I mentioned in QI, butterflies are basically flat on the side, so it shouldn't be that difficult to get the whole side in focus (here partly OOF). Legs are different kettle of fish, so that would be OK. Also I find the BG a bit noisy, which can easily be fixed. Sorry F.B. W.S. 09:03, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
•  Support --Ritchyblack (talk) 04:34, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
•  Support Not very sharp and clean but a very nice composition and situation. Changes a bit from most of the typical harsh flash lighted macro we see. - Benh (talk) 09:51, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
•  Support --Georgez (talk) 12:53, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
•  Support -- Excellent composition, gorgeous creature and good enough quality. I understand the use of a large aperture due to lack of light. Also, at this short distance objects in the same plane, perpendicular to the optical axis, are not treated equally in terms of focus, because distance to the lens may vary considerably. Simple geometry ;-) -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 14:11, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
•  Support -- Raghith 16:11, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
•  Oppose The upper part of the wing is blurred. QI but not FP --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:00, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
•  Support Yeah, it is a little blurry, but it is a beautiful butterfly and picture. JJ Harrison (talk) 07:35, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
•  Support Agree with Alves, gorgeous creature and good enough quality :)   ■ MMXX  ^talk  12:40, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
•  Support Yes, it deserves it. --Gzzz (talk) 17:28, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
•  Support--H. Krisp (talk) 17:58, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
•  Oppose As Archaeodontosaurus (f/4.5)--Miguel Bugallo 19:30, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
•  Support--Butterfly austral (talk) 23:15, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
•  Support —stay (sic)! 05:37, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Jovian Eye _storm 22:49, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods