Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives February 04 2024

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:20240125_northern_cardinal_casa_PD201493.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Northern Cardinal, Close Up, Glastonbury CT USA --Pdanese 01:43, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Support Good quality. --Tagooty 03:02, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree Basically a very nice shot. But I think the photo is overprocessed, in particular there are heavily oversharpened areas right next to parts of the image that have been blurred by denoising. Less would be more. --Smial 12:23, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
  • I'm not an expert, but all I did was run this through DxO PureRaw at its lowest setting. So, there was no _intentional_ sharpening on either image. Not sure if the denoise algorithm does some type of sharpening as well. Nevertheless, I nominated it, so I disagree on the pics being overprocessed (esp. the cardinal). The blue jay image has an unfortunately harsh pine tree in the background. --Pdanese 18:20, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Comment Unfortunately, I have no idea whether DXO has fine-tuning settings and if so, which ones. I would wait for the discussion, it may well be that my "contra" is outvoted, the images are both (For the archive: The other one meant is File:20240122_blue_jay_casa_PD200729.jpg) otherwise excellently exposed and composed. Only the impression of sharpness seems artificial to me. --Smial 19:43, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I agree, quite a lot of sharpening/denoising artefacts. For A7RV images, I often turn off DXO PureRaw's sharpening (called "lens sharpening", if memory serves me well) and apply sharpening elsewhere (happy to discuss this further, if helpful). Has this been processed only with PureRaw, though? The EXIF metadata mentions Topaz Photo AI --Julesvernex2 10:11, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Comment Stumbled over this (in itself a good photo!) and wanted to say the same as Julesvernex2. The sharpening of DxO PureRaw can be controlled and normally does not create such strong oversharpening effects. I would rather guess that this photo has been (accidentally?) sharpened two times – once by DxO PureRaw and then by Topaz Photo AI, as the metadata state. Running two “AI” engines on a photo is tricky … --Aristeas 20:05, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Comment I don't see it in this case, but I'm obviously biased--and I appreciate the community and feedback. Thanks, everyone! Pdanese 15:53, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
     Comment I suppose that the feathers at the top might be a good place to look. Some of them look like they were fused in an incorrect manner and nearby everything becomes really blurry. I suppose that there is a high risk of overprocessing and artifacts if you try to sharpen an image with feathers or hairs. It would be a very good idea to also upload the original photo in such a case. --Robert Flogaus-Faust 17:42, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 17:46, 1 February 2024 (UTC)