Commons:Photography critiques/May 2009

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.


How blurry is blurry?

St John Trunk Bay 5.jpg

Continuing my "how X is too X?" theme... here are two people sea kayaking at Trunk Bay. I am concerned about the focus of the image not being 100% sharp. I don't want to sharpen the image unless I absolutely have to. What do you think? Any other problems? Thanks. Fredhsu (talk) 03:45, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think sharpness is a problem here, it looks pretty ok. Light is one (for me), reflections are overexposed and the characters are underexposed (which may be on purpose, ok). Maybe a polarizer filter would have helped at shooting time. Other thing, the tilt of the water level in the background attracts the sight, it is distracting. Maybe you could do something interesting by cropping the beach out, correcting the tilt and making the ratio wider, leaving the kayak in the lower part of the picture. --Eusebius (talk) 20:27, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Yes, the exposure was intended. But tilt was not. I just corrected tilting of a few of my pictures yesterday. Will do that to this one today. Will also experiment with cropping. Thanks for the ideas. Fredhsu (talk) 02:20, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

What is the threshold noise level?

Caneel Bay Sunset at Scott Beach 2.jpg

Sunset at Scott Beach, one of the seven beaches at Caneel Bay. Is this image considered too noisy? I don't like the result of noise reduction. Do you think it is acceptable as is? Thanks. Fredhsu (talk) 03:23, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid the noise is pretty bad, so it probably wouldn't pass QI. Not that the image will get deleted because of that, but there's probably no sense in nominating it for anything. --Yerpo (talk) 19:02, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Truly. Thanks. Fredhsu (talk) 02:19, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Is intentional tilting accepted at Quality Images?

St Thomas Boat in Choppy Waters in St Thomas Harbor.jpg

Boat in choppy waters in St. Thomas Harbor. I tilted this image on purpose to create a sense of tension. Will tilting automatically disqualify this image? Other comments also welcome. Thanks. Fredhsu (talk) 01:11, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

An intentional tilt can add an interesting effect sometimes. But here it looks very artificial, so I would say no. In this case, it would be different... Yann (talk) 16:21, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Thank you.Fredhsu (talk) 02:18, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Lizard Species

Lizard on leaf.jpg

Can someone identify the species? Thanks in advance Moise Nicu (talk) 17:51, 25 May 2009 (UTC) Pictogram voting info.svg Info The photo was taken on 24 May at noon , in an oak forest.Moise Nicu (talk) 14:41, 26 May 2009 (UTC) 11:10, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't know the species, but it would probably be help if you describe when and where the photo was taken as many species are very similar. --Tony Wills (talk) 02:15, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Planet, hemisphere, continent, country even ? :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 11:50, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Romania, I'd guess... Lycaon (talk) 12:27, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Ok, sorry about that. Country: Romania :-); Region: Southern Dobruja; Coordinates≈44°50'N 28°20'E. Moise Nicu (talk) 14:41, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
I think i found it, not sure though.(Lacerta Viridis) Moise Nicu (talk) 14:26, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm sure you are correct, I've updated the image information. Now you can nominate :-). Lycaon (talk) 14:45, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the confirmation(never saw the ticks before). One more thing: how do I re-nominate it? If I use the box on the FPC list it just directs me to my old nomination. Moise Nicu (talk) 17:13, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Play Voices from Chernobyl

Play Voices from Chernobyl.jpg

Can this image be improved? How to get it right? The light was really very low, and obviously flash can't be used during the play. See also other images of the same play in the category. Thanks, Yann (talk) 21:47, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

That's quite an impressive shot, considering the circumstances. I'd first try despeckling (to reduce noise) and then slight sharpening with Unsharp mask filter in Photoshop (or equivalent in some other image editing program). Not too much, obviously, there's only so much you can do without introducing even more artefacts. --Yerpo (talk) 06:39, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Leptodirus hochenwartii

Leptodirus hochenwartii.jpg

Today, I had an opportunity to photograph this rare creature. It was furthermore my first attempt at using (borrowed) macro lens, so I wonder if the sharpness, DOF, colors and everything else are good enough to try a shot at FPC. Using flash for this animal isn't really the best option, as described on the image page, but it was unfortunately impossible to do it differently. If there's anything else on this picture worthy of comment, please make one. Thanks, --Yerpo (talk) 20:12, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

If it is sufficiently rare that it is difficult to find and photograph, that certainly should be a mitigating circumstance. My in-expert eye says the DOF looks reasonable, especially if it is a live moving subject that doesn't stay in one place long enough to take multiple exposures and do some focus stacking. But I would note that people prefer to have the closer parts in focus, rather than the middle and background - ie get the nearest legs etc and head in focus. --Tony Wills (talk) 02:30, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


Chrome Island Lighthouse

Chrome island 02.jpg

This is one of many images (see the category for 2 others) I took on a nice clear day recently. Not happy with the way the red runs but I do like the scene. --KenWalker (talk) 16:07, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the houses are a bit over-exposed - white walls very bright with little detail, and chromatic abberation along some of the white edges (eg on lighthouse) - but difficult when the rest of the scene has darker colours. You might crop off a small bit of the foreground water so that you end up with 3 relatively equal bands of water, land and sky (island counted as part of the water :-). --Tony Wills (talk) 02:46, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Rio Grande and Santa Catarina


I have two photos. The first photo is about a schooner (Camera HP 5.0 MP) in Rio Grande, Brazil, and the second shows a road (SC-438) in a mountain range named Serra do Rio do Rastro, in the state of Santa Catarina, Brazil. I want a opinion about these pictures... Are these quality images? Scheridon (talk) 02:58, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

The first thing to note is that Featured Pictures and Quality images are not about photographic quality or artistry - they are about photos that meet narrow criteria and suit the needs and whims of those judging them - hopefully illustrative of something useful for projects associated with Commons. That is to say: a brilliant photo may still not meet the requirements of FP or QI :-). So there would be complaints about the first photo: it is not quite a silhouette nor, on the other extreme, is it a good illustration of the subject (ie not well exposed so you can see the detail on the boat). Also the sprays of water to the right are 'unexplained' - ie they don't seem to be anything to do with the subjects of the photo. So a good 'mood' photo but probably not going to excite people judging QI submissions. :-)
The second photo: If the subject of the photo is to be the road, then another angle where you can see more of the structure - switch-backs/corners, tunnels? etc rather than just odd fragments of the road (and the small bit of road in the bottom left is a bit annoying :-). Just my two cents worth :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 03:15, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Having looked at some of your other Serra do Rio do Rastro photos, every now and then I find the following shortcomings: sky not visible, or just not enough for orientation; sky overexposed; horizon not level. It certainly is not the easiest thing in a high contrast situation, as the sky and the rest of the image may require a different exposure. But having no sky, or just a thin line, this you can avoid as I see you start experimenting with panoramic photos. Just make sure you take enough photos to entirely cover your intended image area, even somewhat more, so you can crop the output of your favourite panorama software (I am using hugin) to the size you desire. -- Klaus with K (talk) 12:09, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
I accept your opinions. Thanks! Scheridon (talk) 15:14, 29 May 2009 (UTC)


Sikh pilgrim at the Golden Temple (Harmandir Sahib) in Amritsar, India.jpg

i recently bought a good camera and was lucky to be able to take that photo in amritsar. i think the subject and composition are quite good, but i know little about technical aspects. i'd like to submit it to quality images or featured pictures, can i have your opinion? --Paulrudd (talk) 04:15, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Nominate the picture on FPC and you get my full support. This is a great photo - good quality and perfect composition. Congratulations! --AngMoKio (talk) 08:59, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
What i forgot: Please put the picture in Categories! --AngMoKio (talk) 09:01, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
I nominated it for FPC. Hope you don't mind. --AngMoKio (talk) 19:13, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Yellow Admiral butterfly

Yellow Admiral on thumbnail.JPG

I submitted this butterfly thumbnail to FPC, votes were 50/50 and the main objection seemed to be composition, so can anyone suggest a better crop? My best alternative is below, does anyone else think that it is significantly better? --Tony Wills (talk) 04:06, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Yellow Admiral Butterfly on thumbnail-1.jpg