...Click tag right below your caption...

{full size · edit · tag · add comment · unsubscribe
Contributed by Jon Hart on 22 November, 2009 - 4:03pm}

This will create a "Tagged Images" section just above the Clickable Guide. Be sure to click "Tag All" if you have more than one image.

Next, you would navigate to when you want to move the image. In this case, Frass. You will find a tab for that in the top left of the page:
Home Guide ID Request Recent Frass Forums Donate Help

Click on Frass then look for the "move tagged images" link just above the thumbnailed images.

Now after all of that...

I would see no problem with keeping it even though there are many images of this species. This is a good clear image. It is as good as or better than many already in the guide. I would, however, crop the image to show more fly and less flower... I can do that for you if you would like...

Check the Data tab at Toxomerus marginatus. There's only one other post for this species from your state, and it's a different month than yours. As Ron M. said, you do have a good image. Given that and the way your post helps fill in the Data chart, I'd say you have a keeper here.

*my* dilemma. I have no clue as to what is considered "important" in an image I put up here. I was taught another set of aesthetics basically from childhood insofar as photography is concerned. Shoot and publish or die. Publishers would reject most of the images I post out of hand for many esoteric reasons not related to scientific purposes. I am trying to learn my way out of that mind-set, but its quite difficult after some 40 years of shooting. My first impulse after posting this particular photo was to haul it down immediately after getting an ID. So, its obvious I need to learn how to determine an image's usefulness with different criteria, now.

That varies quite a bit, from the face on a syrphid fly to the foot on a beetle. Check out this article: http://bugguide.net/node/view/258535

Once a creative director in an ad agency, I probably have an aesthetic similar to yours. If you think of yourself as more of a reporter and less of an artist, your head'll be in the right place. There certainly is a place - and a fondness - for pretty here, but large and clear hold sway.

Specifically on flies, you want to show the pattern on the back and wing veins (venation). Side views can be good on some flies, assuming the wings don't obscure the body. Get a face shot if you can. Assuming you have the images, you may often need more than one to tell the story.

"one size fits all"? :-) Actually, the "formula" taught by most good photography types goes: Overall parallel (very important) side shot; overall parallel overhead; dramatic headshot (mostly optional, used for "impact" images for intro to spread or to headline commercial point of view).
I tend to follow this rather closely with extra shots of other areas of interest in close-up. However, the dramatic headshot I feel is useless since it generally obscures much info because of the lighting used. Of course, all this pre-supposes the subject sits still for it long enough to get it done. Many of my subjects are rather more impatient and would really prefer to be out of my sight altogether. It's funny, but for many years I have been fascinated with fly faces. Most people who see the shots tend to have a low threshold for disgust, hee, hee.
Happy Thanksgiving to all, and thanks to Ron M. and Ron H. for all the tips and other help.

...I am needed in the kitchen so this will be a quick note on that subject. Sorry if it sounds short but the turkey calls :)

This site isn't about photography. Composition isn't that important. Good clear pictures with more insect than background is what is needed. I like a good shot as much as the next guy (and gal) but that doesn't always help you get an ID. It will not be of much use to the next person trying to ID their insect if they see a well composed image of a flower with a small insect on it...

I am sure other will have opinions on this topic also so I will yield the floor :)

...more bug is better :)

Thanks, Ron!

Thanks, Ron.

There are over 3050 words there if you count each picture as it's 1,000 word value :)

Glad I could help .

Well, maybe a picture is worth a thousand words, but I have yet to see that thought expressed in a picture.

many a lecture and debate, I think Ron was quite short and firmly to the point, despite his garrulous, some might say loquacious, tract. :-)

.