Commons:Photography critiques

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

color palette logo Welcome to the Photography critiques!

Would you like a second opinion before nominating a photograph of yours as a Quality Image, Valued Image or Featured Picture candidate, can't decide which of your images to enter into one of the Photo Challenges? Or do you have specific questions about how to improve your photography or just would like some general feedback?

This is the right page to gather other people's opinions!

If you want general suggestions to a good photo, you can ask here, and we already wrote guidelines.

See image guidelines >>

If you don't get some terminology used here, don't be shy you can ask about it, or read

See photography terms >>

Please insert new entries at the bottom, and comment on oldest entries first.

To prevent archiving use {{subst:DNAU}}, because SpBot archives all sections after 90 days, unless archiving has been postponed or suppressed through the use of {{subst:DNAU}}. You can ask the bot to archive a section earlier by using {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} – then it will be archived after 7 days.


What do you think about this?[edit]

Cranial imaging of a FFI patient. In the MRI, there are not normal signals in the bilateral frontoparietal subcortical area. MRA showed smaller distal branches of cerebral arteries.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by ChessMaster7734 (talk • contribs) 17:59, 15 April 2018‎ (UTC)

Bay trail[edit]

San Francisco Bay Trail Riders

Comments on this as a possible QI? Thanks. en:User:DonFB

Update: I boldly nominated for QI. en:User:DonFB

Please review a photo as a candidate for QI candidates[edit]

A memorial to jews who were murdered in October 1941 in Dukora, Puchavičy district, Belarus

This is a photo recently uploaded by one of Commons users. Please review it because I once boldly nominated another image for FI and only one user supported it. Now I have doubts about any nomination. --Jarash (talk) 07:13, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

  • @Jarash: Not much to condemn at 100% size. Problems: 1. Overexposed flower too. 2. Slight CA at trees. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 08:16, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Dusk by the sea - QI?[edit]

Dusk in Rowy - Baltic Sea.jpg

I took this photo and I have doubts. I'm worried about noise and light unsharp. Are there any chances for QI? --LoMit (talk) 17:14, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Beautiful picture, but I'm not sure about the noise either... ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 21:53, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

My first few pictures of twilight[edit]

My first few pictures of Earth before sunrise 🙈. Need some comments and feedback on it for FPC and QIC (I wouldn't even try to vote for either because it's literally my first time, lmaok). So here I go tagging some Commons users that have seemed honest enough, please leave honest and even harsh (if necessary) feedback... 😁 Daniel, Cart, Ikan, Basile, Martin, Peulle, Tomas, Six, and Ermell... I apologize for any inconvenience caused... Also, as a side note, I haven't geotagged the pictures yet. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 11:27, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Note that it says this at COM:FPC:
  • Value – our main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others. Pictures should be in some way special, so please be aware that:
   *almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others.
  • So I think I can say just from looking at these thumbnails that none would be an FP. I'd have to examine them more closely to see which one might be judged a QI. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:56, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Tilt is a problem for some of these, for the others it's the camera settings. Taking photos in the dark is exceedingly difficult. I haven't succeeded yet either. Let me know when you manage it.--Peulle (talk) 12:36, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The 2 first pictures are similar, and the #4 #5 #6 and #7 similar too. All of them show strong noise. It also seems that the tripod was not perfectly stable, as they are a little bit blurry at full size, maybe due to the wind, or to some kind of manipulation. Sorry there's no QI here in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:33, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
  • @Basile Morin: Thanks for the feedback, my first pictures so if it isn't a QI I'm not the least surprised. What about #3 and #8? I know #3 is def not QI, too much motion blurring and blown highlights. I was using a small book as a tripod, heh. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 15:35, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
  • The #3 is surprisingly blurry for a long exposure shot -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:21, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment All images are too blurred. If you are using an inexpensive kit lens you should not open the aperture completely but always close one or two steps. For long exposures, you can lower the ISO settings to reduce image noise. Without a tripod such shots make no sense unless you declare it art.--Ermell (talk) 19:34, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment per others. You have a keen eye though. There are some really good ideas you present here. Keep at it! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:07, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Shanti Stupa, Leh[edit]

Shanti Stupa, Leh

Hi, Do you think it is worth postprocessing edits (it is out of the box)? Trougnouf said on QIC that it needs a "perspective correction/rotation", but I don't think so. Correction of noise in the sky? And yes, it at 3700 m altitude, so the sky is normally this dark. I couldn't bring my Nikon, so I was left with my smartphone... Regards, Yann (talk) 05:59, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

is this an FP?[edit]

Schweriner Schloss

I've had a number of failed FP nominations lately. I really like this photo, but is it an FP? I think the composition is beautiful, and the form is very strong, with the streaming lines of the clouds and their reflections in the water. However, some viewers might object that the Schloss should be a bit sharper, one window is blown (I really hope that wouldn't be the basis for any opposing votes, though) and parts of the exterior are scaffolded for renovation. So what do you think, is it worth a nomination? Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:57, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Honey and preserves
Also, what about this one, of honey and preserves? I really enjoy moving my eye around the picture frame, but will it be considered special enough? Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:09, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Ikan Kekek: IMHO, the first picture's resolution is a little too low to be sharp enough, and there is some prominent and distracting CA at the leaves of the trees, especially the trees on the left side. For the second picture, I can't say that I really agree with the angle (small distortion because of the range), use of a tilt-shift lens would be quite an improvement but not everyone has them. Definitely better than my recent pictures though, which for some reason are really unsharp and noisy even at ISO 100.... ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 01:13, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Side note: I think the honey picture is slightly tilted CCW. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 01:15, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for your input, and it's good to see you here. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:49, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
And never mind about the Schloss photo anymore. He uploaded the full-sized photo, and it's more obvious to me now that the quality is not close to FP level, and possibly problematic for QI. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:40, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • @Ikan Kekek: I agree. It seems like a photo you'd find on 500px. Nice shot and a really beautiful thumbnail but not sharp at full size. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 09:12, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Church window[edit]

I appreciate any feedback about this photograph. Thanks --Reinhard Müller (talk) 21:20, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

I like it and think it should pass at QIC. For FPC, a bit more sharpening would be needed and the size might be questioned. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:06, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
Thank you Ikan Kekek for your feedback. I now nominated it for QI. --Reinhard Müller (talk) 15:45, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Reinhard Müller (talk) 15:45, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Corvus head[edit]

@Ikan Kekek, Charlesjsharp, W.carter: Possible FP? I messed up the settings for this one, I had kept the settings for my previous photoshoot which explains the low resolution: I was shooting on Nikon's JPEG-Fine-Medium setting. If only I hadn't blundered! ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 14:31, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

I've only looked at the crow. I will struggle not to be negative. Could I suggest you look at the dozens of web pages that offer advice on photography - there you would find help on subject, composition, POV, background, camera settings, DoF etc. So a bid needs to be 'side on' or further away to get the beak and eye in focus; black birds are the most difficult to photograph, the background needs to be a pleasant bokeh or nice blue sky (impossible with a black bird!). Try submitting images to QI before FP. This one should fail there. Good luck. Charles (talk) 14:46, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
@Charlesjsharp: Thanks for the response. I can take negative criticism if you have any, so that I can improve. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 14:54, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
This picture was actually against a green and dull grassy background so I decided to turn it into a B&W so that I don't feel nauseous when I look at that dull green. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 14:55, 5 October 2018 (UTC)