Original - The Red-backed Toadlet (Pseudophryne coriacea) from eastern Australia.Edit 1 by
Fir0002 - NR, colour balance, sharpening, corrected lens (?) shadow in lower RHS
Reason
Clear and accurate photograph of this species, which is quite hard to photograph due to its nocturnal habits, small size and bulging eyes (need to get a second flash very low to the ground so the eye doesn't create a shadow over the rest of the face).
Weak Support Edit 1 - sounds like it was quite a difficult shot to get, however I think you could have positioned your second flash a bit better so that the shadow cast by the head was minimized. --
Fir000210:53, 16 February 2008 (UTC)reply
neutral - I'm ambivalent by this nom. It seems like a case where the subject may just not be conducive to an FP - the lighting is harsh, as are the highlights. I don't know if subject matter can/should preclude an image from promotion, so I'm going neutral here.
deBivort17:42, 16 February 2008 (UTC)reply
Oppose both. Poor lighting and sharpness. Also, it took me a couple seconds to figure out what I was looking at, and at first glance, it hardly looks like a toad.
Juliancolton (
Talk)
15:10, 18 February 2008 (UTC)reply
Original - The Red-backed Toadlet (Pseudophryne coriacea) from eastern Australia.Edit 1 by
Fir0002 - NR, colour balance, sharpening, corrected lens (?) shadow in lower RHS
Reason
Clear and accurate photograph of this species, which is quite hard to photograph due to its nocturnal habits, small size and bulging eyes (need to get a second flash very low to the ground so the eye doesn't create a shadow over the rest of the face).
Weak Support Edit 1 - sounds like it was quite a difficult shot to get, however I think you could have positioned your second flash a bit better so that the shadow cast by the head was minimized. --
Fir000210:53, 16 February 2008 (UTC)reply
neutral - I'm ambivalent by this nom. It seems like a case where the subject may just not be conducive to an FP - the lighting is harsh, as are the highlights. I don't know if subject matter can/should preclude an image from promotion, so I'm going neutral here.
deBivort17:42, 16 February 2008 (UTC)reply
Oppose both. Poor lighting and sharpness. Also, it took me a couple seconds to figure out what I was looking at, and at first glance, it hardly looks like a toad.
Juliancolton (
Talk)
15:10, 18 February 2008 (UTC)reply