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.
Sorry Hulged, but technical quality is very poor. Image is overall unsharp, noisy and full of compression artefacts, owing (probably) to the poor quality of the camera. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 08:48, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
@Hulged: It's very difficult to get a QI out of a smartphone. Their megapixel count keeps increasing but they're limited by a tiny lens. That said, this is pretty good for a smartphone picture. The light is nice, and it's not all that undetailed. IMO it's on the edge of QI and will probably depend on who reviews it. As Alvesgaspar is aware, there is some variability in the standards reviewers hold QIs to. :) Certainly getting a dedicated camera will help, though. — Rhododendritestalk | 12:57, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Ah, I'm so sorry, I was looking at the thumbnail to the right! Yes, File:PHC Ichgam January in 2021.jpg does have some problems that would prevent it from being QI, I'm afraid. Sorry for the confusion. To make this comment a bit more constructive: the light there is definitely nice -- good eye to see that -- and I'd try to get directly in front of the house, and maybe lift the camera up as much as possible to get over the fence (or even through the fence! that's the most distracting part for me). But one part of what I said remains: having a separate camera will make a big difference. — Rhododendritestalk | 13:00, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Something strange happening here, making the image sharp and blurry in turns. See annotations. Has it been taken through a window pane? Usually, there should be nothing but air between your camera lens and the object :) --Kreuzschnabel 10:41, 20 November 2021 (UTC) Quality is very poor though, even in the sharp areas. Smartphones just aren’t really good cameras, see what I stated above. Get a small point-and-shoot-camera of reasonable quality, you won’t regret it. --Kreuzschnabel10:41, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
Fascinating! Somehow that does not really look like and optical phenomenon to me. I'd suspect that something happened in the processing stage. The metadata contains an undefined 0x8889 EXIF tag that contains "portrait". If this was shot in "portrait mode" (or however Xiaomi calls that), that might well be the software trying to blur the background in order to produce some "fake-bokeh" around the person in the center – and failing miserably, because there is no person in the center. So tip for the future @Hulged: maybe try to avoid portrait mode and see if that helps. --El Grafo (talk) 08:38, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
