Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Arachnis picta edit1.jpg

Arachnis picta

Reason: A high detail macro, illustrating the subject clearly. A small part of the foreleg is out of focus, but the rest of the body is visible in high detail, as are the other two legs.
Articles this image appears in: Arachnis, Lepidoptera
Creator: Calibas

Support as nominator with preference to edit 1 --Mostlyharmless (talk) 01:50, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Editors might fuss over dof issues, and pick here and there, but the image is gorgeous. The aesthetic appeal is huge. I could wallpaper a room with it. --Blechnic (talk) 06:31, 3 July 2008 (UTC) Well done edit, by Mfield, also. Either one, lean a bit towards edit at low res. --Blechnic (talk) 16:25, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Might this be the best image we have of Lepidopteran wing scales? If so, that would be a safe article to include it in. PS Cf. Image:Lepidoptera wing.jpg. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 08:50, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's now in Lepidoptera, along with another much needed labeled illustration. I'm divided over which better illustrates scales however. 'Lepidoptera wing' works better as a thumb. Mostlyharmless (talk) 01:36, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Very well done picture. Clegs (talk) 15:33, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Edit1 Mfield (talk) 17:44, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Edit 1. It's an impressive image, and the quality is good (especially with the edit). NauticaShad es 23:07, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support both with preference to edit one. Spencer^T♦^C 01:21, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The other images in the articles are much more illustrative of the subject. While interesting and mostly well focused, this one doesn't show much of the organism it self. It would be better suited for an article on coloration and/or camouflage.Greener Cactus (talk) 20:30, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Arachnis_picta_edit1.jpg MER-C 07:52, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]