This GOP is less of a challenge and more of a simple roundup of miserable stock photography. Alex Wild and others have long ago pointed out the massive failings of many stock photo sites – but here is a brief and painful lep roundup using Google.
Step 1: Image search “moth on flower”.
Step 2: Üz ovucu.
Here is a caption of the first page of results. Excluding the photos that have no moths and are “moth flowers” (= Phalaenopsis orchids) – yalnız 4 out of 18 images are correct! I might give you 6/18 if you count two obviously staged photos… but here is my list of reasons starting with 1= top left and 26 = bottom right. (list below)
1) tamam, good start! This looks like a Manduca növ (Sphingidae) feeding on a Datura flower. I’ve seen this myself in the wild – great capture!
2) Orchid
3) Downhill we go. Obviously a butterfly – Phoebis növ (Pieridae).
4) Lycaenidae butterfly – Callophrys növ.
5) Hesperiidae – skipper butterfly.
6) Another moth! Looks like an Autographa növ (Noctuidae).
7) Certainly a moth, however something I’m unfamiliar with.
8 ) Hyles sphinx moth nectaring. Blurry, but a moth!
9) Another skipper. Just because it’s brown doesn’t mean it’s a moth.
10) Orchid
11) Luna moth on flower. tamam, yes it’s a moth – but I’m sorry, a pretty obviously staged photograph. Actias luna does not have mouthparts – you’d never find one willingly sitting on a flower.
12) Yet another skipper butterfly.
13) Orchid
14) Vanessa butterfly! I thought the Painted Lady was about as obvious of a butterfly as possible.
15) Orchid
16) Orchid
17) Pieridae butterfly on a flower.
18) Orchid
19) Cisseps moth (Arctiinae) – our last real moth photograph. The webpage has it identified as Pyromorpha dimidiata (Zygaenidae), however the antennae are wrong and this is most likely a tiger moth in the Ctenuchinae.
20) Oh come on, butterfly! Polygonia növ.
21) Moth – lakin, staged… Mən heç vaxt belə bir çiçəyin üstündə oturan Sfinqidaya rast gəlməmişəm. Bu ailə çiçəklərə asanlıqla nektar verir, axmaq kimi onların üstündə oturmağa meylli deyillər.
22) Orchid
23) Orchid
24) Kəpənək, Phyciodes növ.
25) Ən pis səhnələşdirilmiş fotoşəkil. Bu, çiçəyin üzərinə fotoşopla çəkilmiş və ya olmayan yayılmış bir nümunədir (cılız görünür). Qırılan antenalar, cırılmış qanadlar… Güvənin sol ön qanadındakı kamera kəmərindən kölgəni də görə bilərsiniz. Ancaq birtəhər Flickr-da hansısa qrupdan medal qazandı.
26) Eyni kəpənək kimi 24, rəngdə.
Oğlan, dəhşətli məşq bitdi.
Hee. Baxmayaraq ki, bu sizin üçün dəhşətli ola bilər, mənim üçün əyləncəli idi. Maraqlı. Yazıq kiçik kapitanlar! =) Təşəkkür.
Mən açıq-aydın səhnələşdirilmiş kadrın açıqlanmamasına görə yayılan ay güvəsi fotosuna şərh yazmışdım.. O, silinə bilər, but for now it’s a nice juxtaposition to all the gushing comments like (to paraphrase), “Heyrət! Vay, you found that in the wild?” və “I never see these with enough light to get the shot.”
Here is another shocker for you Chris! Bəli, there is a NZ endemic moth called the Magpie moth (Nyctemera annulata) but it is mostly black with a few white blotches and is an Arctiine rather than a Geometrid. There is another even more obvious photo mistake earlier in the article.
On the subject of the inability to identify moths butterflys etc and the lack of quality photos. The UK has recently seen several awful articles of moths and their food plants being portrayed as frankly destructive creatures. First story i have heard of is clothes moths (micros) the image used in the articel was several macro moths on a piece of material! The second a newspaper with a journalist with a huge grudge againt ragwort (basically a report of lies!)it was awful to read, just made me cringe to read it and how someone has so little knowledge of the natural world. Ragwort being an excellent species for wildlife in the UK.
alqış
Justin
[…] Chris notes Google’s ineptitude with moth identification […]