Commons:Photography critiques/February 2022

Any chances for FP?

Hi. Recently I took and edited pictures of some utility goods. I know that Featured Pictures must be good of technical quality and be one of the best on Commons. But I have doubts about that "wow factor" – of course, many FP are magnificent (landscapes, monuments, etc.), but I can see a lot of very good images of common things (usually on a white background). I suppose they show objects in an interesting way (e.g. File:2017 Nikon D5500.jpg or File:Electric steam iron.jpg).

• 
• 
• 
• 

Well, that calculator is a common object, but in my humble opinion, it's a very good representation of a modern pocket calculator on Commons (see FP and QI in the Calculators category).

Pictures of the calculator and folding camera are edited (which I marked with the "Retouched picture" template) – I deleted uneven grey background and other things metioned in each file description.

I wonder which picture has a chance for FP. I would be greatful for response :) --LoMit ^talk 16:21, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Edit: I added a new image --LoMit ^talk 14:08, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

• LoMit Sorry that no one has replied so far. I think your photos are very valuable and they have a high potential at COM:VIC if you choose to nominate them there—especially the camera and calculator, which have a very well-defined scope. as for FPC, there's only one way to find out for sure. Even if unsuccessful, you would probably get tips on taking even better photographs in the future. Buidhe (talk) 01:07, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi, LoMit. I know we already judged the donkey photo. The first three all look like serious FP candidates to me, but I can't predict how people would react to them. I don't think I'd vote for the lamp, but I'd consider voting for at least the calculator. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:16, 25 April 2022 (UTC)