Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Grosser Wollschweber Bombylius major detail.jpg

Bee fly (Bombilius major)

Original - Bombylius is a large genus of flies belonging to the family Bombyliidae (the bee-flies). The genus has a global distribution.

Edit 1 Tweaked histogram in the blacks

Reason: very detailed picture where you can see the typical hairiness and the impressive sucker. This species lives in forrests close to warm clearings. Its very hard to do a picture of this species because they abscond at the tinies motion in their environment. Feel free to Google around, where you will find out that there are no pictures available in this quality and size.
Articles this image appears in: Bombylius
Creator: Richard Bartz

Support as nominator Richard Bartz (talk) 11:16, 22 April 200 (UTC)
Support original - One of the best insect pictures in Wikipedia. I confirm the extreme difficulty in taking a decent shot of this species. But Richard didn't explain yet how he got the critter asleep... -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot meet them, they meet you if you remain quiet & motionless on one spot, the camera still aimed --Richard Bartz (talk) 12:13, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I dont understand the term asleep, do you mean a pause ? Like every insect they have periods during a day when they are less active, based on the species and many other circumstances. When i was doing the observations on this beauty (for 10 long days!) i recognized that they are only active when the sun is really bright, otherwise they back-out in the forrest. This was my chance then on a changeful clouded day. I found a look-out on the forrest ground, heading outside to the clearing and was waiting for 4 hours. In the meantime i found out something interesting. There was a flower 20" left to me on the border of the clearing, and on this afternoon (a period of aprox 4h) it was heavily visited by 12 different species. This project now has totally changed my behaviour in photographing insects. Before, my strategy was "run and gun" on everything which is tiny and moving, but now i think its much better to setup the camera (with a tripod and a infrared remote-control release) on a nice place and wait motionless. They come along its just a matter of time --Richard Bartz (talk) 02:27, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The term asleep was, of course, a joke as I never saw these critters still. Yes, I also thought of that strategy but it takes too much time from my work... -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 07:27, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

~~Weak~~ Full support My first thought: is that black line the snout, or a wing in unfortunate angle? Should be mentioned in the caption. (If it's the snout, and the caption is corrected, then I'll strike the "weak" from my support.) Also, let's hope this image encourages someone to do something about the article it appears in - it's a one-line stub at the moment! This photo would also be appropriate in Bombyliidae, a (slightly ;-) longer article... PS: This is one of the few pictures that look fuzzy in thumbnail, but get sharp in full size! --Janke | Talk 12:15, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Janke, if you look at the alternative image (in the image description), you'll see that it's the proboscis. I'd change the caption, but I'm unsure whether the large size is characteristic of the genus, or just the one species. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 12:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC) Prefer original. Alternative feels faded. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 23:31, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support and Comment. I've gone ahead and expanded the article a bit. That proboscis is characteristic of the genus indeed. By the way, does anyone know how to make the little *show*\*hide* option ? I think that'd work well for that big species list in the bottom of the article. Cheers. --Mad Tinman _T _C 13:39, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~. Excellent macro. I'm surprised by the large DOF considering the aperture used. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 15:43, 22 April 2008 (UTC
- Support either with preference for Edit 1. There isn't much in it but Edit 1 has slightly better black levels/contrast IMO. Would be happy to support either though. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 12:54, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support what an awesome bug! (an an awesome photo of course) Mangostar (talk) 16:30, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks good! I wish I looked like that. ;) Spencer^T♦^C 02:02, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Shoo-in. NauticaShad e s 02:10, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support Edit 1. The edit improves upon an already fantastic photograph. NauticaShad e s 21:33, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support per all above. crassic!^[talk] 03:15, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
SupportThe freddinator (talk) 04:32, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lots of Support. Beautiful picture! Spinach Dip 08:07, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support Edit 1 Nice photo with great sharpness - my only problem is what looks like poorly done focus bracketing at the tip of the wing. I say focus bracketing because the entire wing is in focus and the leg closest to it is out of focus - and I say poor because the leg and area surrounding the wing edges is unpleasantly out of focus. --Fir0002 08:46, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support either, slight preference towards original. Edit 1 is a bit glare-y to me; original is a bit easier on the eyes, IMO (possibly due to my monitor?). faithless (^speak) 10:24, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support edit - grand image.--Svetovid (talk) 22:41, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support both well done. —αἰτίας •discussion• 16:04, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support either good picture. --H92110 (talk) 07:41, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:Grosser Wollschweber Bombylius major detail edit.jpg MER-C 11:48, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]