Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Mating Great Grey Slugs

Mating Great Grey slugs

Reason: A unique and fascinating view.
Great grey slug
Creator: Spleines

Support as nominator Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 22:33, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Other pictures of the same thing for comparison: Commons:Category:Gastropoda sex Mangostar (talk) 23:29, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: if adding several images to the nomination, it's best to place additional images directly below the first image in the code. This stops enormous white spaces from appearing in the text. See the difference between this version and the current one. Raven4x4x (talk) 00:37, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. A truly bizarre scene. It looks like they're oozing silicone glue. :-) The quality/composition of the image(s) is not really up to scratch though. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 16:57, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment It's by far the best images I can find of it, however. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 17:35, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - I understand, and looking at the others I agree, but I think its an established principle that not every subject automatically deserves a Featured Picture in lieu of a good one. Some subjects are obviously harder to photograph than others, and there is allowance for that, but there are still minimum standards that need to be met. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 18:06, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Agreed, but I do think that this is an excellent picture of a very difficult to photograph (due to rarity) event. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 18:15, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - Is it really that rare? Surely slugs mate all the time, as there is no shortage of them. Its more that few people go out at night looking to photograph mating slugs, I would imagine!? Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 20:20, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        As soon as I saw the alternative it reminded me of a very similar photo (including the brick wall background) I took a number of years ago back when I only had a fixed focal length compact film camera, i.e., I don't pretend for a minute that my version would be good enough for FPC. However it tends to suggest it's not that rare, it's just if it happens somewhere that someone with a decent camera is going to see it. --jjron (talk) 08:07, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose original, support alternate Too much cut off in the original. Normally we might look for higher quality or better lighting, but these, er, guys aren't going to perform in a studio, as it were. In that case, I think the harsh lighting is at an acceptable level. Matt Deres (talk) 18:51, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support alternate, weak support original. I think Matt has the right idea about this. Maybe we can do something about the harsh contrast that the corner of the building gives? Lighten the shadow? That'll improve the picture quite a bit, I reckon. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 19:30, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose both per Diliff. Just because no better image is available doesn't mean that one up to FP standards is not possible. But nonetheless, the most interesting picture I've seen at FPC in a long time. Thegreenj 20:29, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've added a cropped and retouched version of the alternate. I'm honestly not sure about the crop, but moving further left gives us the big dark shadow and moving further right cuts too close to the ~~snots~~ slugs. Matt Deres (talk) 00:24, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The crop removes the mucus strand they're hanging by - that's an important detail to the Great grey slug mating process. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 12:32, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - I tend to agree. Unfortunately, the uneven edge of the wall cuts to the right at that level and the deep shadow off the wall is what I was trying to avoid. Maybe the creator could just get a couple of very small bottles of hootch and some gay gastropod porn and get them in the mood for another go before the lights? Matt Deres (talk) 22:52, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice subject but the flash lighting is overpowering and the backgrounds aren't good. -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 01:34, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Agree, flash is certainly nessesary in this one, but exposure comp should have been set lower. Capital photographer (talk) 02:32, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Huh? Setting exposure comp lower would just give an underexposed picture. This isn't fill flash; flash is the only source of lighting. Thegreenj 03:41, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - One could use other lighting sources. Lamps, strobes, hot lights, etc. Its not as if the slugs were going anywhere is a big hurry. ;-) -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 03:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Harsh lightning, certainly a better picture can be quite easily taken. EgraS (talk) 07:12, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above. ^8th star 14:41, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 12:49, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]