Can someone please explain to me, in detail, what I did wrong and right in taking this photo? --TheHighFinSpermWhale 18:16, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
The species must be defined in order to be of encyclopedic value. The fence is disturbing to me. --Ikiwaner (talk) 05:57, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
And to me too, as well as the wall or roof or whatever that is behind it. --TheHighFinSpermWhale 16:53, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Pacific Tree Frog
A common frog in british columbia, thoughts on the photo....?
Ah, a Pacific tree frog. One of my favourite animals, I have eight of them. However, this image is of quite poor quality, unfortunately. It is only 1.48 megapixels, its very soft and blurry, and noisy too. Still, a good start a macro photography. --TheHighFinSpermWhale 16:40, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Newcastle Island British Columbia
I'm a novice 'photographer', thoughts.....?
Technically, quite good, however, the trees on the left are a bit on the soft side, and those on the right suffer from purple fringing. And the forest is cut off, I think it should show more to the right and a wee bit less on the left. --TheHighFinSpermWhale 16:58, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Parque Nacional Heurquehue, Chile
Which of the above 4 images is best?Bdell555 (talk) 10:49, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
I'd say no. 4 because it's the least overexposed and has the best composition (in my opinion, of course), but unfortunately all suffer from excessive compression and chromatic aberration. — YerpoEh? 06:15, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for directing me to the technical terms. I bought the Sanyo CS1 full HD videocamera earlier this year, and wondered if a lens the size of a dime could possibly record 1920x1080 video and also take photos without a problem. Turns out the chromatic aberration for the still photos with that camera is rather severe. On the other hand, it easily fits in my pocket.Bdell555 (talk) 23:17, 18 September 2010 (UTC)