Commons:Photography critiques/August 2008

Grand Harbour, Valletta

• 

I'm going to upload this image in higher resolution, so I'm asking you to tell me if I should crop it on the right or not? If cropping, how much? Any other comments are welcome :) --GregorioW (talk) 20:31, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

• I would crop out some of the sky to follow the rule of thirds. Crapload (talk) 03:50, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Bluff Knoll

• 
  Bluf knoll panorama
• 
  alternative

Looking for comments on composition, stitching etc recognising that the sky is an issue and that og jpg artifacts around some of the trees where they are backed by the sky. Gnangarra 10:36, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• Stitching and composition look fine to me but it is difficult not to notice the other problems ;-). Especially the chroma noise and contrastingly, a seemingly harsh noise reduction visible in the trees left. Lycaon (talk) 20:11, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Amiens city hall

• 

This picture was taken without a tripod, which is a shame. Anyway, is there something I could improve about it? Is there something I could have done better when taking the picture? Thanks in advance Eusebius (talk) 09:14, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

• Perspective seem to be OK, but there is much distortion and the building looks curved, plus purple fringes into lights. At the moment of the shot it would have been a good choice to use a tripod to get less noise, and use bracketing (maybe you don't have this on your camera) to avoid light clipping. Another thing is to shoot at twilight/dusk to get a dark blue sky, and not a perfectly black one. --Pom² (talk) 08:50, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the remarks. I didn't have a tripod at this time, but the need for it was pretty obvious. I have bracketing on my camera, but without a tripod it is pretty useless, no? It is true that I have a strong barrel distortion at low focales on this camera, I now correct it digitally. --Eusebius (talk) 08:56, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
    • If you use bracketing for HDR, shoot without tripod generally cause slight perspective differences and images don't overlap perfectly. But you can simply merge them manually, with layer masks for exemple in photoshop (like this, for stain glasses).
      • OK, I will work this technique then (my tripod not being perfectly stable)... Actually I did use bracketing for this picture, but didn't use the other pictures. --Eusebius (talk) 09:44, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Gerbil

• 

Has this picture a good quality? Is the light and sharpness ok or should it be improved? I know, the background and some other things are disturbing, the composition isn't very well. But for technical critics, I would be grateful. Manuel R. (talk) 17:17, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

• It looks as if the camera you are using produces quite a bit of artefacts/noise. That hardware issue will be difficult to avoid. It shows on the background and also on the fur of the rodent. This will be hard to improve. You will not get FP or QI with this camera, but with a proper background and composition, the images you produce can very well be Valued Images when presented with geolocation, adequate description, categorization and scope. Lycaon (talk) 20:20, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
• Thanks for your answer! I look if I can change the format of the pictures. Perhaps the camera stores them better in an other format.

Church in Athens

• 

What do you think of this picture? What could be (could have been) improved? I guess it would have been better to have the sun hitting a bit more on the front, rather than on the hidden side. Any comment would be useful. Thanks! Eusebius (talk) 07:13, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

The white details look a bit bluish. Fiddling with the colour levels in post-processing might address that. The sky has quite a bit of a cyan cast, which can also be retouched in post-processing, but a filter adapter for your camera and a circular polariser filter is a much better option in the long run. Otherwise a nice, clean composition. Some might dislike the presence of the birds, but I appreciate the fact that they give a sense of the scale of the subject. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:08, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments! Fixing what you pointed out might be, however, technically or financially out of my reach :-) Eusebius (talk) 19:06, 4 August 2008 (UTC)