Support Some blurriness could be a concern, but the species and its rolled-out tongue outplay that for me.
Brandmeistertalk 11:05, 17 March 2012 (UTC)reply
Neutral. Good shot, nice job getting the tongue, but the fact that the head is just a little OOF gives me a pause.
Clegs (
talk) 09:02, 18 March 2012 (UTC)reply
The tongue has unavoidable motion blur, but the head is in focus. The scales on the head are smooth, while those on the body are
keeled. That's how it is in nature.
Papa Lima Whiskey 2 (
talk) 10:08, 18 March 2012 (UTC)reply
Well then, call it noise or artifacting. For some reason, the head does not look sharp.
Clegs (
talk) 07:59, 20 March 2012 (UTC)reply
I added a subtle noise reduction and uploaded over the top.
Papa Lima Whiskey 2 (
talk) 20:07, 20 March 2012 (UTC)reply
Support per nom.
Tomer T (
talk) 12:53, 19 March 2012 (UTC)reply
Weak support Nice subject and colours, shame the tongue is not in focus... Also would have cropped it a bit more widescreen to improve composition --
Fir0002 03:05, 21 March 2012 (UTC)reply
Weak neutral I really don't know with this one. It looks kind of artefacted, and the white scales seem blown, but the head is pretty nicely in focus, and the habitat is great too.
Aaadddaaammm (
talk) 18:25, 22 March 2012 (UTC)reply
Weak Support b/c the head is slightly out of focus.
JJ Harrison (
talk) 21:44, 22 March 2012 (UTC)reply
Support: not a perfect image, but good res and meets criteria.
Julia\
talk 22:26, 25 March 2012 (UTC)reply