This image shows the entire plant, is unobstructed, has good depth of field, the color is accurate, and it depicts well the pale to deep blue petals, 5 to many in a terminal spike, that are distinguishing features of this species. As compared to File:Camassia_quamash_6380.JPG, the flower is at a better angle and the base of the plant is in focus. -- Walter Siegmund(talk)
Comment It was hard for me to choose, also, but I thought some may object to File:Camassia quamash 6379.JPG because one of the basal leaves is cut off on the right and the base is out of focus. In addition to my comments above on File:Camassia_quamash_6380.JPG, I didn't like the foreground large-leaf plant that is probably a weed but is unidentified. The same or similar species is visible in the nominated image, but is in the corner where it is less objectionable to my eye. All three pictures were taken at f/11, so the depth of field is the same (except for the effect of subject distance which is similar for the three images). But you make a good point that the background of this image is more varied than that of the other two and may be more difficult for the eye to separate from the subject. Thank you for your thoughtful question. Walter Siegmund(talk)19:08, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support As already pointed out by Lycaon, there are several good candidates to choose from, each with its own advantages and disadvantages. I will follow my immediate instinct when looking at the gallery, where I found this image is the cleanest and best illustration of this species. --Slaunger (talk) 07:17, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
