Wandering glider

Reason

Good quality, DOF and EV. Same species as this recently failed nomination, but IMO all the faults mentioned there do not apply to this image. The angle is also as what had been suggested in that nomination.

Articles this image appears in

Pantala flavescens

Creator

Muhammad

• Support as nominator -- Muhammad (talk) 19:33, 14 June 2009 (UTC) reply
• Support but I predict a rush of requests for a scale by tomorrow... Time3000 ( talk) 16:33, 15 June 2009 (UTC) reply
• Comment White balance is warm again. Noodle snacks ( talk) 00:45, 17 June 2009 (UTC) reply
• Weak Support Good EV, although I prefer the composition of the other one. Makeemlighter ( talk) 22:01, 20 June 2009 (UTC) reply
• COmment Quality's ok, colour balance just looks wrong. If this was shot raw, maybe try a conversion with default settings and see if what pops up better resembles original conditions. -- mikaul ^talk 04:11, 21 June 2009 (UTC) reply
• Edit 1 Uploaded Colour balance cooled. -- Muhammad (talk) 07:50, 21 June 2009 (UTC) reply
• Request Since I was away for the majority of the nomination time and was unable to respond to the problem, could this nom stay open for a few more days? -- Muhammad (talk) 07:50, 21 June 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Surely wadester 16 19:40, 21 June 2009 (UTC) reply

Further discussion on update would be appreciated. wadester 16 19:40, 21 June 2009 (UTC) reply

• Support Edit 1 Quite an amazing picture, do tell the secret ;) Cyclonebiskit ( talk) 11:19, 22 June 2009 (UTC) reply
• Support edit 1 Better colour balance, good composition. Spencer ^{T♦ Nominate!} 12:30, 22 June 2009 (UTC) reply

Promoted File:Wandering glider horizontal edit1.jpg -- wadester 16 04:45, 23 June 2009 (UTC) reply