i can't find the proper id for this little butterfly- it is about 1/2 inch long. thanks, greg

-- greg rothschild (gnr@toast.net), July 03, 2000

Answers

Greg,

You've been posting some terrific shots recently (especially the dragonfly at PC - that was spectacular) and this is another fine one. The detail and DOF in all parts of the shot are really nice. Exposure details and film? This isn't a butterfly - its a moth, probably in the family Pyralidae, but since you're in California (I'm assuming) it's way out of my range to be able to id it to species. You can tell by the antennae and the way he folds his wing back over the body that it's not a butterfly. Sure is a pretty little pyralid - most of them are kind of dull brown and inconspicuous. Great work, Greg.

Peter

-- Peter May (peter.may@stetson.edu), July 03, 2000.

A most lovely rendering of both moth and vegetation. Well done!

-- Garry Schaefer (schaefer@pangea.ca), July 03, 2000.

Excellent shot. My only quibble is the one leaf in the middle right which pokes out of the depth of field towards the lens. Or is this a product of the scan? I can't tell.

-- Christian Deichert (torgophile@aol.com), July 03, 2000.

Very good contrast between the moth and the leaves - It is a moth and not a butterfly so identification will be difficult. There are no really good field guides to moths - esprcially small and tiny ones. In any event it's a wonderful image.

-- Carroll Hughes (hughescck@citcom.net), July 03, 2000.

thanks for all the comments. Peter asked about exposure details and film- the film was provia and the technical details are as follows: 300mm lens, 55mm of extension tubes, 1.4x converter- all that shot at f22 but unfortunately i can't remember the shutterspeed. i think it was in the neighborhood of 2 seconds.

greg

-- greg rothschild (gnr@toast.net), July 04, 2000.