The Carolina Locust (Dissosteira carolina), a common American grasshopper.Brighter, whiter. Edited with Photoshop's levels tool. Black and white points set.
This is the frontispiece from Insects, their way and means of living, R. E. Snodgrass. When I saw it I knew Wikipedia had to have it. Used in the article grasshopper. Dissosteira carolina does not yet have its own article.
Oppose - The accuracy, detail and size are all more than adequate. but...so drab. Kinda ruins it for me. sorry. looks like it'll pass anyway though. --Deglr632806:01, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's underexposed. White is grey. Looks like someone using that $8,000 camera made some really poor exposures (in manual even), for reproduction work! I suppose it could be adjusted for exposure in Photoshop but quality will suffer slightly. Ziggur06:24, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I personally prefer the drab colours, but I've uploaded a brighter version. The camera work was done by the University of Toronto scanning center as part of a high volume book scanning pilot project in association with the Internet Archive. It's actually one of the better works done by the project. —Pengo07:09, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer the drab version too, the the colors in the bright one look very different. It's a watercolour/drawing anyway, so I can't see how it can be "underexposed", the grey background is a legitimate artistic choice of the artist.--Antone12:24, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I really doubt the publisher (it wouldn't be the artist's call) would print on grey paper like that. It kind of looks like the person who photographed the page (and probably all the others) took a metering off a white surface. Camera meters assume anything it's looking at is a neutral scene equal to what's called 18% grey, so if you meter from a white surface, a camera will underexpose it and make whites grey, and colors underexposed and "drab." Ziggur15:25, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OpposeThis one is not used in any article so far. - And I can't think of any article for which this picture would be especially descriptive. That is no FP for me. Mikeo08:38, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]