This is the current revision of this page, as edited by imported>MalnadachBot at 15:07, 27 February 2023(Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.Revision as of 15:07, 27 February 2023 by imported>MalnadachBot(Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12))
Captures the finer features of a mantis shrimp with remarkable detail, including fluorescence (maybe it could benefit from cropping but I do not know how).
Support It's definitely informative. It shows the colors quite well, more so than most pictures of the subject. Might it be possible, though, to clean the background up a bit? Sophus Bie(talk) 03:02, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Oppose - Whoa, whoa, whoa. We just can't go promote any picture with EV to FP. This is extremely dark, I can barely make out the subject, let alone the features in detail. Also, see debivort's comments above, this is not FP material, although it is interesting. Sorry ;( ₪Ceran →(slip→sled →snow) 02:24, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Ceranthor, how do you propose a photograph demonstrate fluorescence without being darkness? TAway (talk) 03:01, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Not all subjects can realistically be illustrated to FP standard, though. Nobody is contending that it isn't a good example of fluorescence. It just isn't up to the technical standards of FP, thats all. Diliff | (Talk)(Contribs) 21:08, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Oppose. Just a bit soft and 'processed' looking. Admittedly a difficult subject to photograph, but probably more of a VP candidate than FP. Diliff | (Talk)(Contribs) 21:08, 14 January 2009 (UTC)