Dainty Green Tree Frog
This image appears on the Dainty Green Tree Frog page and was taken by User:Froggydarb
- Nominate and support. - Froggydarb 09:26, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Weak opposeNeutral - he has his eyes closed, and the green leaf behind is exactly the same colour, which reduces the utility of the image in an article. The closed eye is the biggest defect though. Stevage 09:55, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Just a note, his eye is wide open. -- liquidGhoul 09:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- I wondered - it *looks* closed though. Awkward.
Stevage
11:15, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- Hehe, that's pretty funny :). His pupils are very constricted, you can almost not see them. -- liquidGhoul 11:22, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, that photo was taken in the day believe it or not.
Froggydarb
12:30, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- Does that species of frog even have eyelids (I don't know about frogs, however I know that many species of herps don't)? -- Pharaoh Hound 17:24, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. It's a good picture, but not an FP to my mind. Something about pose/angle and illumination. - Samsara ( talk • contribs) 14:32, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- If you get another opportunity, maybe try a less direct flash? - Samsara ( talk • contribs) 14:34, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- Weak Oppose. The frog seems to be saying:"AAA, my eyes, that flash is too bright!". Other than that, it's just not a very impressive image. -- Pharaoh Hound 16:56, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- This photo was taken in the day, of course his eye is going to be constricted. Froggydarb 22:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- OK, let me rephrase that, I don't like the lighting. I didn't really mean to refer to weather his pupils are dialated or not. -- Pharaoh Hound 17:24, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. Too dark overall and the flash reflections on the frog's body bug me. howch e ng { chat} 18:19, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- Do you mean the background is too dark? Frogs are always wet. You can't not get a reflection off a wet surface.
Froggydarb
22:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- Would there be any way to get a photo using natural light? howch e ng { chat} 06:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- Comment The problem with using natural lighting is when you photograph a frog you want to have the highest shutter speed possible so no blurring occurs, when you take a photo with natural light even when it is a very bright day you will have to drop the shutter speed so that the picture isn't under exposed, this will usually cause blurring on the image, I could use a tripod but most of the time when you are taking frog pictures, either the ground is too bumpy or the frog is in a place where you can't use a tripod, eg you want to take a photo of the side of a frog and it is on the ground. If you used a tripod you would be taking a picture of the top of the frog.
Froggydarb
23:15, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- Fwiw, my tripod can take photos about 5cm off the ground. Of course, its maximum height is only 20cm, so I wouldn't recommend it as your *only* tripod :) You have my sympathies though. Stevage 18:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
- Comment The problem with using natural lighting is when you photograph a frog you want to have the highest shutter speed possible so no blurring occurs, when you take a photo with natural light even when it is a very bright day you will have to drop the shutter speed so that the picture isn't under exposed, this will usually cause blurring on the image, I could use a tripod but most of the time when you are taking frog pictures, either the ground is too bumpy or the frog is in a place where you can't use a tripod, eg you want to take a photo of the side of a frog and it is on the ground. If you used a tripod you would be taking a picture of the top of the frog.
Froggydarb
23:15, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- Do you mean the background is too dark? Frogs are always wet. You can't not get a reflection off a wet surface.
Froggydarb
22:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose Someone should nominate this image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Litoria_gracilenta.jpg instead. -- BWF89 13:08, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- Support. Looked quite ordinary as a thumbnail but it's quite amazing in full res. Great depth of field (ok, so it's daylight) and superb detail and has species identified and all that. I'm not sure how the green leaf could possibly be confused for the frog.. The line between them is very clear. — Pengo 18:22, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- I didn't say they could be confused, but the leaf is certainly distracting being the same colour and right behind the frog. Stevage 18:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose, Needs better angle and colours. sikander 21:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
-
Oppose As above --
Fir0002
www
04:16, 14 May 2006 (UTC) - Oppose I agree with what Samsara has to say. Mr. Turcotte talk 21:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
- Support I agree with Pengo on this. Although it is not the best pose, it is a very nice photo. The eye is especially beautiful. -- liquidGhoul 13:30, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
- Support. This is a nice frog, however the pose of the frog makes it look more lanky than it actually is. The standouts of the photo are the eye and leg colouration.-- Tnarg 12345 12:03, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Not promoted ~ Veledan • Talk 14:43, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
Dainty Green Tree Frog
This image appears on the Dainty Green Tree Frog page and was taken by User:Froggydarb
- Nominate and support. - Froggydarb 09:26, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Weak opposeNeutral - he has his eyes closed, and the green leaf behind is exactly the same colour, which reduces the utility of the image in an article. The closed eye is the biggest defect though. Stevage 09:55, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Just a note, his eye is wide open. -- liquidGhoul 09:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- I wondered - it *looks* closed though. Awkward.
Stevage
11:15, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- Hehe, that's pretty funny :). His pupils are very constricted, you can almost not see them. -- liquidGhoul 11:22, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, that photo was taken in the day believe it or not.
Froggydarb
12:30, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- Does that species of frog even have eyelids (I don't know about frogs, however I know that many species of herps don't)? -- Pharaoh Hound 17:24, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. It's a good picture, but not an FP to my mind. Something about pose/angle and illumination. - Samsara ( talk • contribs) 14:32, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- If you get another opportunity, maybe try a less direct flash? - Samsara ( talk • contribs) 14:34, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- Weak Oppose. The frog seems to be saying:"AAA, my eyes, that flash is too bright!". Other than that, it's just not a very impressive image. -- Pharaoh Hound 16:56, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- This photo was taken in the day, of course his eye is going to be constricted. Froggydarb 22:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- OK, let me rephrase that, I don't like the lighting. I didn't really mean to refer to weather his pupils are dialated or not. -- Pharaoh Hound 17:24, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. Too dark overall and the flash reflections on the frog's body bug me. howch e ng { chat} 18:19, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- Do you mean the background is too dark? Frogs are always wet. You can't not get a reflection off a wet surface.
Froggydarb
22:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- Would there be any way to get a photo using natural light? howch e ng { chat} 06:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- Comment The problem with using natural lighting is when you photograph a frog you want to have the highest shutter speed possible so no blurring occurs, when you take a photo with natural light even when it is a very bright day you will have to drop the shutter speed so that the picture isn't under exposed, this will usually cause blurring on the image, I could use a tripod but most of the time when you are taking frog pictures, either the ground is too bumpy or the frog is in a place where you can't use a tripod, eg you want to take a photo of the side of a frog and it is on the ground. If you used a tripod you would be taking a picture of the top of the frog.
Froggydarb
23:15, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- Fwiw, my tripod can take photos about 5cm off the ground. Of course, its maximum height is only 20cm, so I wouldn't recommend it as your *only* tripod :) You have my sympathies though. Stevage 18:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
- Comment The problem with using natural lighting is when you photograph a frog you want to have the highest shutter speed possible so no blurring occurs, when you take a photo with natural light even when it is a very bright day you will have to drop the shutter speed so that the picture isn't under exposed, this will usually cause blurring on the image, I could use a tripod but most of the time when you are taking frog pictures, either the ground is too bumpy or the frog is in a place where you can't use a tripod, eg you want to take a photo of the side of a frog and it is on the ground. If you used a tripod you would be taking a picture of the top of the frog.
Froggydarb
23:15, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- Do you mean the background is too dark? Frogs are always wet. You can't not get a reflection off a wet surface.
Froggydarb
22:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose Someone should nominate this image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Litoria_gracilenta.jpg instead. -- BWF89 13:08, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- Support. Looked quite ordinary as a thumbnail but it's quite amazing in full res. Great depth of field (ok, so it's daylight) and superb detail and has species identified and all that. I'm not sure how the green leaf could possibly be confused for the frog.. The line between them is very clear. — Pengo 18:22, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- I didn't say they could be confused, but the leaf is certainly distracting being the same colour and right behind the frog. Stevage 18:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose, Needs better angle and colours. sikander 21:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
-
Oppose As above --
Fir0002
www
04:16, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose I agree with what Samsara has to say. Mr. Turcotte talk 21:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
- Support I agree with Pengo on this. Although it is not the best pose, it is a very nice photo. The eye is especially beautiful. -- liquidGhoul 13:30, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
- Support. This is a nice frog, however the pose of the frog makes it look more lanky than it actually is. The standouts of the photo are the eye and leg colouration.-- Tnarg 12345 12:03, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Not promoted ~ Veledan • Talk 14:43, 21 May 2006 (UTC)