Nearly all your photos are well composed and well cropped, but occasionally a photo can be too loosely cropped such as:

This is of course a matter of personal aesthetics, but BugGuide is, I think, more geared towards arthropod identification and information than towards artistic photos which are perhaps more appropriate for sites such as Flickr. Having said that, there are many thousands of truly beautiful photos posted here, including many of your own, but cropping can facilitate identification and doesn't necessarily detract from an artistic rendering of the animal.

Mike,

Honestly, I think that it is up to the contributor then to alter the image - not someone else. If it doesn't suit the site's needs, then simply frass it.

If you want photographers (some of us now professional) to keep contributing top-notch images to this online guide, you need to respect that personal aesthetic. If I choose to show more of the background on an image, I always try to make sure the image is large enough to zoom in and see all the detail that is captured of the subject.

Please respect my photos and do not alter them at your choosing on behalf of the site.

Thanks,
-T

Tony, I will certainly respect your no-crop wishes and yes all yours and others images can be "zoomed in" on, but having recognizable images at the thumbnail size (the zoomed out size) is actually *very* important to sorting and identifying the several hundred thousand images posted to bugguide.

Your initial comment above alludes to this reality:

*Browsing* through the guide, I couldn't find any matches. *At a glance*, it appears to be a species of Griburius.

You didn't have time to zoom in on each image and frankly, neither does anyone else.

Images that are frass worthy can actually sometimes be salvaged by cropping, lightening, flipping etc.

Thanks for your many quality contributions. Mike

...and I see your point. And I can imagine the sheer volume of images that are yet to be identified.

Usually, I try to state where/how I arrive at a identification (books, internet, etc.). If it is a image, such as this, where I am guessing, then I try to incorporate some of the background (like the plant in this case) so that it may aid in identification to the more experienced.

So thanks for understanding:)

Now that that's cleared up, the markings do seem a bit different to other images here, and other specimens that I've shot. Can the markings be variable on this species?

Thanks

Red face, legs, and undercarriage don't jive with true Griburius larvatus which has yellow legs, black face, and black and white verso...

Scanning through the Crypto spp. for the third or fourth time, I think it might be this sp: