In today's world, Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Vierfleck Libellula quadrimaculata.jpg has become a topic of great relevance and interest to a large number of people. From its impact on society to its influence on popular culture, Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Vierfleck Libellula quadrimaculata.jpg has captured everyone's attention, generating debate, reflection and analysis. With a history dating back centuries, Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Vierfleck Libellula quadrimaculata.jpg has left an indelible mark on human history, and its influence continues to be palpable today. In this article, we will explore the various facets of Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Vierfleck Libellula quadrimaculata.jpg and its meaning in the modern world, analyzing its impact in different areas and its relevance for the present and the future.
Original - The Four-spotted Chaser is a dragonfly species found across temperate regions of the Northern Hemisphere.
Reason
Another of Richard Bartz' superb macro shots. There seems to be some delay with getting these nominated on the English WP (many of them are featured on Commons and the German Wikipedia, among others). I hope we can catch up a bit.
Support. Neutral. I'm impressed that the sharp focus goes almost to the wing tips. —Pengo 03:13, 10 August 2008 (UTC) (guess focus braking explains why "f/7.1" could get so much in focus) —Pengo12:48, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
There is no guarantee that the creator is actually reading this nomination - just for general information. I notified him but he may have a reason for announcing his departure from the German WP. And I don't think anybody else has the originals. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 21:25, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Oppose As Pengo pointed out it is quite unusual to find a shot like this which has a DOF from wing tip to wing tip. And there's a very good reason for it in this picture - it's a (poorly done) focus bracket. Don't believe me? Well perhaps you could explain how the focus varies in and out along the stem of the (presumeably straight) plant stalk? I'd also be interested in the reason behind the out of focus areas on the wings. The doubling up of the cells in the wings is also highly unusual. But perhaps most disturbing of all is the leg appearing through a wing!! While I have no problems with focus bracketing as a technique (I do it myself), I do have a problem with poor examples such as this one, which produce a very unrealistic and therefore highly unenc photo! I'm also not keen on the fact that it wasn't disclosed on the image description page - very misleading to most people! --Fir000208:00, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Oh and from a purely aesthetic stand point I think there's too much dead space in this image - could do with a tighter crop (get rid of some of the RHS) --Fir000208:01, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
No I think Richard is still active . But I agree, you don't have to explain anything I'm convinced - if you read this comment in context I'm addressing it to a hypothetical person who disagrees... --Fir000208:38, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Neutral, it's a nice image, but I concur with Fir's technical points. A better stitch would get my support. --Janke | Talk09:06, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Regretful oppose Focus brackets are best done in artificial, controlled conditions where the subject is not moving (which, for animals, means sedated, sleeping, or dead)--see here. Maybe even a poorly done focus bracket would be better than nothing, but the leg through the wing kills it for me.--HereToHelp(talk to me)14:06, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Okay, just for clarification - where does it say what the condition of the animal was in the wolf spider series? I can't find any evidence that it was either of those things (sedated, sleeping, or dead). (Not to mention that it's a poor comparison as the spider doesn't have wings, but fair enough, I get your point.) Grateful if you (or Fir) could clarify. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 16:33, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
The spider was initially cooled in a fridge to sedate him - although it didn't seem to last long and there were many failed brackets before I got this one. --Fir000211:32, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
