Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives January 16 2023

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Deers_of_Sundarbans_26.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Spotted Deers of Sundarbans --Fabian Roudra Baroi 19:17, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 20:15, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
  • I agree and therefore move to  Oppose for now, thank you. The problem with the spots on the back is probably due to al heaving highlight/white correction. Probably not fixable. --Poco a poco 11:16, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Overcategorised and we need the species of the animal to be identified to be a QI. --C messier 20:25, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Digital errors - file corruption? --Grunpfnul 20:38, 8 January 2023
  • Thanks for the review, added the species of the animal and fixed the digital error. Anything else? --Fabian Roudra Baroi 06:08, 9 January 2023 (UTC)(UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --Wasiul Bahar 06:10, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Again this one has processing artefacts, the spots on the deer look really strange - just pure white splotches with no furry texture at all. BigDom 09:31, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment The categories need to be as specific as possible. This is overcategorised, being in categories like Bangladesh. Categories aren't hashtags. I see there is country specific category for this species, so it should be in it. Also, it will be helpful if you categorise in the male/female/juvenile category too. --C messier 19:47, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment Thanks everyone for your critics, actually the highlights were blown as I took the picture directly under the sun at noon. I tried to fix as much as I could but couldn't fix the white spots. If there is any way to fix it let me know please --Fabian Roudra Baroi (talk) 05:51, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
    • If the highlights are blown there's not much you can do, it's best to expose for the brightest part of the image and bring the other colours up in post-processing if needed. BigDom 18:00, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
      •  Comment This depends somewhat on whether the overexposed areas are important to the image. In the case of the patterns in the fur, I would consider it important in any case. I would tolerate small, shiny reflections on insect wings, for example, but also on other shiny objects, as long as they do not cause color distortion. Largely overexposed parts of the image are not acceptable at all. Overexposed image parts that lead to clipping in individual color channels and thus to color distortions are not acceptable either. Popular and typical in the latter case are blue skies that run into turquoise/cyan, but also sunlit reddish facades that tilt to "yellow". --Smial 12:21, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 16:02, 15 January 2023 (UTC)