Commons:Photography critiques/January 2010

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

January[edit]

Linderhof Castle[edit]

  • Hello, please tell me if this picture have any chance to be featured on commons. It was really difficult to take the picture without a tripod. Thanks for your help! --Pe-sa (talk) 19:47, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • I see it's already VI. Well, you could be lucky, but I guess it will in general be considered too unsharp for a FP, since the photo could have been taken with tripod (even if they are not allowed). --Leuo (talk) 13:36, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Phalaenopsis amabilis cultivar[edit]

Probably neither. It has too little depth of field, and only a small part of the flower is actually sharp. On top of that, the color balance is off, and the image too yellow/brown. --Leuo (talk) 20:01, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Olsene Castle[edit]

Probably won't become a FP. For QI you'd need to post process it more: correct the heavy chromatic aberration (good visible on tree in the right on the picture), the tilt CCW, and the possibly the perspective distortion. The sky is not overexposed, just gray I think, so I guess that is OK.--Leuo (talk) 19:59, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative[edit]

  •  Info Chromatic aberration reduced. What is CCW and what is possibly wrong with the perspective? Paul Hermans (talk) 22:41, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • CCW = counter clock wise. About perspective: Not all white lines in the image are in parallel. If you rotate the image that the most centered white vertical line (one edge of the tower) is correct, then the other white lines probably are slightly tilted and the wall will look a bit odd. Some judges don't like that. --Leuo (talk) 13:29, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative2[edit]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Photography_critiques/January_2010&oldid=34576334"