Commons:Photography critiques/August 2017

FP candidate?

Do you think any of these has FP posibilities? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cvmontuy (talk • contribs) 18:11, 31 July 2017‎ (UTC)

Sorry for the late answer, but FWIW I think this was indeed the best choice out of that set. --El Grafo (talk) 09:55, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

How would you make this better?

I took this photo of a BLU-82 at the National Museum of the Air Force a couple weeks ago and I've been debating on how to improve it. I try to avoid post processing as much as possible unless I intended to beforehand but I know there is more going on in this shot then I want. I'm not necessarily going for a QI since it's an inside museum shot but I feel it's a good picture as well as better than the current profile picture of a BLU-82 on wikipedia in my opinion. So what are your thoughts on this? -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 2:46, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

I wouldn't know how to give you technical advice, but what I notice is that the composition is pretty good, with the major exception that the BLU is cut off in the near right corner, the photo is probably too grainy for QI, and the lighting, which you have no control over, has not been kind to the subject. You also haven't found any category for the photo, which it needs for any kind of feature and should have, anyway, and also, you really should give some basic explanation in your file description on what a BLU-82 is and does, because otherwise, how would people know? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:27, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

I sincerely appreciate your timely reply. I’m working on adapting several other shots to be possibly uploaded in the future so this is all very helpful. The categories I fixed as that was simple. I’m working on a short description as well and will be adding that soon. The grain is somewhat my own fault as I felt the RAW was too flat. When not viewed in full zoom I think works. The corner though I don’t think I can fix. I still think it’s better than the current one on Wikipedia as the other profiles look very over or under exposed but I agree, I don’t think this is a QI. Also is there a simple way of adding the UTC time to your edits that I haven’t figured out or is everyone writing it out themselves like I am? -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 03:39, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

File:2017 Tunele kolejowe pod Świerkową Kopą.jpg

Rail tunnels under Świerkowa Kopa

Hi, everyone. I'm really loving this form, with its near-symmetry, and I'm feeling like nominating this picture by Jacek Halicki at FPC, but I think it might get voted down because maybe others won't feel wowed by the motif of the end of a rail tunnel. If anyone would like to give an opinion, that would be great. Otherwise, I'll have to make my own decision without guidance. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:11, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Ikan, I can see why you like this and I agree, at least to some degree. But to me it's missing that certain little something that elevates it above "snapshot" level. Probably one of those images I would pass on voting at FPC. --El Grafo (talk) 10:51, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your opinion. I will look for photos that are more obviously breathtaking or striking. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:41, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

File:Zirkus Chnopf in Zurich.jpg

Zirkus Chnopf in Zurich

Hello, this is a photo of the facade of "Zirkus Chnopf" building in Zurich, Switzerland. Please let me know what you think about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shootzurich (talk • contribs) 10:22, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi @Shootzurich: that's a very interesting subject, but I think it has the potential for "more". The car and the graffiti feature some nice colors, but they look a bit flat in your image. Looks like this was shot on an overcast day – depending on the location it might be worth a try shooting it again in the warm light of an autumn morning or afternoon to get more punchy colors. That worked pretty well for me here. If that's not possible, maybe try tweaking the white balance a bit towards the warmer regions? Composition-wise, I'd try to keep the grey wall and window on the far left out of the frame, possibly the other window as well. Maybe include some more of the blue window (?) in the bottom right corner, or zoom in to include only the front of the car together with the cupcake? Just some random thoughts, I think this is definitely a subject spending some more time on if you're still in the area.

By the way, if the graffiti is signed it would be fair to credit the sprayer, possibly using {{Art Photo}} instead of {{Information}} (with {{FoP-Switzerland}} in the |artwork license = parameter). Cheers, --El Grafo (talk) 08:24, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Eclipse/QI Question

Diamon Ring in White House , TN

I just got back from Tennessee early this week and I’ve been going through the shots I have from Mondays Eclipse. I’m not sure this is my best shot but it’s useful to illustrate my question. Even shots before totality and certainly shots during taken totality will not be 2MP if you consider the black pixels from the dark sky. Can any photograph of the eclipse be nominated for a QI considering the circumstances of photographing a total eclipse? Also I’d like any comments/opinions on this photo. Thank you in advance! Sixflashphoto (talk) 17:41, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

@Sixflashphoto: You've got 2027 × 2027 = 4,108,729 pixels in this one, so you definitely should be fine at QI regarding image size even if you crop a bit more. I think a bit of black around the sun is necessary for this kind of image: this, for example, has a far too tight crop for my taste.

Regarding the photo itself, well, to me it looks like a typical well-done shot of the eclipse. One thing I haven't seen in other pictures, though, it that brighter grey ring on the outer part of the moon (Can you see what I mean? I think my English might be lacking here …). Do you know where that comes from? Did you maybe remove some CA/color-fringing and this is what was left over? --El Grafo (talk) 09:10, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

@El Grafo: I apologize for my late reply. I’ve still been getting situated since returning from seeing the Eclipse. I’ve added a different crop. I’m undecided myself on if I like it more but I would like your opinion. I’ve also looked at other shots I took during totality. I believe the gray fringe is just a result of a relatively long exposure (f38 at 1.5sec). I’ve seen other shots during totality that did have CA’s from what I believe were solar flares on the opposite side of the sun, but I did not remove any CA’s on this one. Frankly I find removing CA’s on Eclipse shots extremely painstaking.

Just to experiment I worked around with the color correction in RAW and couldn’t do anything about that gray ring. I do think I made it a bit better by just slightly bringing up the blacks. You lose a bit of the Outer Corona but I feel that’s alright in this particular shot.

So I would like to know what you think of this?

@Sixflashphoto: I was just curious about that ring. I think the picture looks pretty good – that's all I can say, I don't have the expertise for anything beyond that ;-) --El Grafo (talk) 07:52, 5 September 2017 (UTC)