Commons:Photography critiques/August 2018

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

File:PAP MTW WJ京13068@3.jpg

This section was archived on a request by: 廣九直通車 (talk) 08:26, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Just before, I visited Beijing and took a number of images, notably files of emergency services vehicles. I think that File:PAP MTW WJ京13068@3.jpg may have a chance to be a quality, featured or valued image due to the great blaring lights (I believe this makes the image featured), and such type of police automobiles of the People's Armed Police is noticeably rarer than the ordinary police automobiles. As a similar photo submission utilizing the lights was failed , I would also like to know why the submission failed (The reviewer only stated that “You're not serious. Are you?”), and know about would the file regarding will have a chance to be a candidate of QI, FI or VI. If not, can anyone also explain briefly to me, as I am only an amateur, thank you.廣九直通車 (talk) 13:44, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

You can use English to explain. And I guess the reason why the former submission failed is due to the blurs?廣九直通車 (talk) 23:55, 3 August 2018 (UTC)


  • The user who reviewed your nom, is very very rude, irresponsible, and it blatantly biting a user, despite having been here for quite some time. He should have explained and given a good reason. I feel ashamed of the people here for not reprimanding him. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 02:01, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
  • And as for the aforementioned image that you had inquired about, imo it wouldn't pass FP or QI because of the camera shake (1/10 is really not ideal), but maybe VI (if the subject is really rare and it is the best image on Commons, and if you could ID it properly). ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 02:55, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
Well, perhaps I should be more focused on dealing with copyright issues? Anyways thanks a lot for your comments.廣九直通車 (talk) 05:29, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Dusk by the sea - QI?

I took this photo and I have doubts. I'm worried about noise and light unsharp. Are there any chances for QI? --LoMit (talk) 17:14, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

My first few pictures of twilight


My first few pictures of Earth before sunrise 🙈. Need some comments and feedback on it for FPC and QIC (I wouldn't even try to vote for either because it's literally my first time, lmaok). So here I go tagging some Commons users that have seemed honest enough, please leave honest and even harsh (if necessary) feedback... 😁 Daniel, Cart, Ikan, Basile, Martin, Peulle, Tomas, Six, and Ermell... I apologize for any inconvenience caused... Also, as a side note, I haven't geotagged the pictures yet. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 11:27, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

  •  Comment - Note that it says this at COM:FPC:
  • Value – our main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others. Pictures should be in some way special, so please be aware that:
   *almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others.
  • So I think I can say just from looking at these thumbnails that none would be an FP. I'd have to examine them more closely to see which one might be judged a QI. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:56, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
  •  Comment Tilt is a problem for some of these, for the others it's the camera settings. Taking photos in the dark is exceedingly difficult. I haven't succeeded yet either. Let me know when you manage it.--Peulle (talk) 12:36, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
  •  Comment The 2 first pictures are similar, and the #4 #5 #6 and #7 similar too. All of them show strong noise. It also seems that the tripod was not perfectly stable, as they are a little bit blurry at full size, maybe due to the wind, or to some kind of manipulation. Sorry there's no QI here in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:33, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
  • @Basile Morin: Thanks for the feedback, my first pictures so if it isn't a QI I'm not the least surprised. What about #3 and #8? I know #3 is def not QI, too much motion blurring and blown highlights. I was using a small book as a tripod, heh. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 15:35, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
  •  Comment All images are too blurred. If you are using an inexpensive kit lens you should not open the aperture completely but always close one or two steps. For long exposures, you can lower the ISO settings to reduce image noise. Without a tripod such shots make no sense unless you declare it art.--Ermell (talk) 19:34, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
  •  Comment per others. You have a keen eye though. There are some really good ideas you present here. Keep at it! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:07, 6 August 2018 (UTC)


This section was archived on a request by: ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 05:26, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Shanti Stupa, Leh

Shanti Stupa, Leh

Hi, Do you think it is worth postprocessing edits (it is out of the box)? Trougnouf said on QIC that it needs a "perspective correction/rotation", but I don't think so. Correction of noise in the sky? And yes, it at 3700 m altitude, so the sky is normally this dark. I couldn't bring my Nikon, so I was left with my smartphone... Regards, Yann (talk) 05:59, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Well, the sky could be dark, but in general Yann, seems to be dark, probably because the white temple.
I took the liberty to do a version of the photo.
-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 11:57, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 10:18, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Photography_critiques/August_2018&oldid=326959551"