Support There are some out of focus areas but no important detail is lost imo. The detail in the important areas and the background and lighting are very good. There are some blown highlights in places as well but I don't really think it effects the image much. Noodle snacks (talk) 12:17, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yeah, there are some weak points (mentioned by Noodle snacks), but it's still a quite good picture. Well done. —αἰτίας•discussion• 22:43, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose Subject is cut off (bottom of the left leg). Although there might be an explanation for it I also suspect there has been some significant and unpleasant editing to the background colour/saturation. I base this off the following: the leftmost leaf has a very odd colouration with dapples of green sharply contrasting with the rest of the leaf (this is characteristic of saturating only in the green range in Photoshop); there are strange red outlines around many of the OOF background leaves; and the underside of the ant's black abdomen seems tinted in the greens too much (reflections?). Not bad but those issues prevent it from being FP worthy IMO --Fir0002 02:39, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose - It seems a bit over sharpened to me. I can see green and red dots all over. Also, as per Fir0002. (Giligone (talk) 14:10, 7 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Oppose. I suspect Richard would agree that this is not one of his best. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 11:56, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not promoted --jjron (talk) 08:31, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
