Commons:Photography critiques/April 2019

File:Train in China DSC 6877 (9368500725).jpg

This section was archived on a request by: 廣九直通車 (talk) 13:38, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Well, I knew my photography techniques is nothing better than an amateur so I am not going to nominate my files. Yet I recently found File:Train in China DSC 6877 (9368500725).jpg, with a yellow train contrasting with the dark surrounding, which is, in my opinion, is eye catching and quite artistic? Would somebody comment on this file, thank you?廣九直通車 (talk) 05:45, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

•  Comment @廣九直通車: Indeed it is. But it's got no chance at QIC, since QIs require works of WikiMedians themselves. Might just get a successful nomination on FPC, who knows. I'd give it a solid  Support. ― Gerifalte _Del Sabana 13:44, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

@GerifalteDelSabana: Thank you. I have created the nomination page, yet it seems that there are some problems. Would you be able to help fixing it? Thank you.廣九直通車 (talk) 01:28, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

The problem has been fixed by me afterwards. I think the discussion can be closed then.廣九直通車 (talk) 07:04, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Is this FP level or not ?

This is the image I'm talking about

Hi there,
I want to nominate a picture for FI, but I don't know if it's gonna get selected, but I think it's FP level. Can anyone please tell me is this FP level ? If it's FP level then what cat should I use Commons:Featured_pictures/Natural_phenomena#Reflections or anything else ? Thanks and please ping me -- EATCHA (talk) 07:38, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

@Eatcha: Nice picture, but I am afraid that the level of background noise is a bit too high for FP. If you have the RAW file, that may be corrected, but not sure. Regards, Yann (talk) 07:44, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

@Yann: , I removed the noise, is it okay now ? Please try to tell me everything you feel wrong with this Image, for which it may have to face heat at FP nominations page ? Thanks -- EATCHA (talk) 14:42, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Yes, better. But now there is a halo around the obelisk. I foresee some people will object that, although it is OK for me. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:17, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the help -- EATCHA (talk) 16:29, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

@Eatcha and Yann: FWIW, in my opionion the noise reduction went waaay to far here, you've lost a lot of detail. The soft red glow around the obelisk doesn't bother me much, but the purple glow around the tower on the right looks really strange, especially in the later versions. I think you may have went a bit too far with the color adjustments in the later versions. It looks amazingly punchy at first sight, but I think I prefer the first version, as it looks more natural to me (and it still has plenty of "WOW!"). My advice would be: Go back to the first version, and instead of cranking up the noise reduction just tune down the sharpening a bit. Try to get rid of the purple halo around the tower. Apply a bit of counter-clockwise rotation so that the fountain is straight and you've got my support at FP. --El Grafo (talk) 08:04, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

@El Grafo and Yann: , Is it FP level now ? -- EATCHA (talk) 13:07, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

@Eatcha: much better, I think it would be worth giving it a try! --El Grafo (talk) 07:55, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Yes, much better, but why the sky has become black? It might be OK, but I just wonder... Regards, Yann (talk) 14:18, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

The sky is blue again, thank you both for your reviews. -- EATCHA (talk) 20:12, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 19:23, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Need some suggestion/opinions/whatever on Animated Videos

Hi there,
I want to nominate some videos at FPC, but I am not sure about anything. Do you think think these are potential FPs ?

Joy & Heron - Animated CGI Spot by Passion Pictures

The hyperlinked text below the thumbnails will throw you at the respective File
Try to find errors that could backfire, I won't mind. Thanks, -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 19:14, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

• @Eatcha: The first one imho. Smooth animation and a good story-line. I personally find it quite well-animated. Don't see any significant artifacts (or just artifacting for that matter). Would definitely give it a support, but I'm no expert. ― Gerifalte _Del Sabana 15:05, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

  @GerifalteDelSabana: , Thanks for your opinion. BTW I also feel it's the first one that deserves the FP stamp -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 16:13, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

 Comment I nominated the first video here , but anyone Interested in the second one may provide his/her opinions. Thanks -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 20:07, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: 🇪A〒ℂ🇭A  💬 10:48, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Is this picture FP level ?

Nice bird

--Cvmontuy (talk) 18:54, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Cvmontuy! It's a nice shot but I'm missing a composition here. The other crane is hidden. I'd like it to be well visible, sharp and complementary to the crane on the left, or not to be there at all. Now it only provides a distraction and makes the background kind of messy. I hope it helps. Keep on shooting! --Podzemnik (talk) 10:48, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Opinion on shots like this

Just want some opinion on shots like this, could one possibly pass FPC? ― Gerifalte _Del Sabana 03:09, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

I like the creative DOF but it doesn't focus on anything interesting. If there was at least a nicely visible tongue or something, I think it could be passable. Your shot reminded me of this :) --Podzemnik (talk) 03:29, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks haha ― Gerifalte _Del Sabana 03:38, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

This specific image as several minor issues that in combination would make it at least difficult for it to succeed at FPC (sharpening halo along beak; lack of lead room; bright highlights in the corners distracting from dark subject; lack of detail in the shadows; some might call for more DOF (although I'd disagree); slightly front-focused; …). But in principle: yes, I think something like this could very well succeed at FPC. --El Grafo (talk) 15:06, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Fountain about to be in a thunderstorm

Angela Conner 'Renaissance' water sculpture, Hatfield House, Hertfordshire

I quite like the juxtaposition. Is this a possible FP? Why or why not? Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:10, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

• @Ikan Kekek: Possibly an FP; the lighting is in no way perfect but the picture itself is OK. Would probably vote  Neutral on it. ― Gerifalte _Del Sabana 02:53, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
• Too much going on in this one for my taste. The fountain in the foreground is already quite dynamic. The sky looks dramatic, but it is very close to the main subject in terms of tone and color, so they kind of merge together into a busy wall of grey. Doesn't help that the water reservoir below the sculpture basically has the same color as well. The same composition taken on another day with different light and weather could work very well, but this is just too much for me in a death metal kind of way. From that series, I find numbers 3 and 4 much more interesting – at least as far as composition goes. --El Grafo (talk) 12:54, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I am not fan of this kind of modern art, but the picture is quite good. Composition is nice, without any disturbing element. Regards, Yann (talk) 07:47, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

@Ikan Kekek I'd support it at FPC. --Podzemnik (talk) 23:15, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, guys. Maybe I'll nominate it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:17, 6 May 2019 (UTC)