Commons:Photography critiques

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Shortcut
 SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 7 days and sections whose most recent comment is older than 90 days.

color palette logo Welcome to the Photography critiques!

COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES (index)

Would you like a second opinion before nominating a photograph of yours as a Quality Image, Valued Image or Featured Picture candidate, can't decide which of your images to enter into one of the Photo Challenges? Or do you have specific questions about how to improve your photography or just would like some general feedback?

This is the right page to gather other people's opinions!


Update this page
Update this page


Start a new topic

If you want general suggestions to a good photo, you can ask here, and we already wrote guidelines.

See image guidelines >>

If you don't get some terminology used here, don't be shy you can ask about it, or read

See photography terms >>

Please insert new entries at the bottom, and comment on oldest entries first.

To prevent archiving use {{subst:DNAU}}, because SpBot archives all sections after 90 days, unless archiving has been postponed or suppressed through the use of {{subst:DNAU}}. You can ask the bot to archive a section earlier by using {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} – then it will be archived after 7 days.


Archive


AM Berretto[edit]

Any suggestions for improving this QI/VI? I'm sure it can be fixed further. 多多123 16:28, 12 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@多多123 Are you interested in improving this specific shot (i.e. post processing) or suggestions on how to take a better one next time? El Grafo (talk) 07:40, 14 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Post processing :) 多多123 11:06, 14 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@多多123 Sorry for the late reply. Honestly, I don't see anything that would require improvement in that regard. If is was my image, I'd call it done and move on to something else. El Grafo (talk) 09:24, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Okay, thank you! 多多123 10:20, 1 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bokeh[edit]

Bokeh on a cherry tree's leaves.

I know I might be silly for using a camera phone, but poor users exist :) I just got this really nice Samsung it seems, starting to understand what focus really is (my old one didn't have manual focus/DoF controls). Is this shot good? Does it represent the concept of bokeh well? I created it by moving the focus distance extremely close (at 10 cm), creating this bokeh effect.

Also, are there any of you also using camera phones? Can you give me some general photography advice?

Thanks, Gugalcrom123 (talk) Gugalcrom123 (talk) 12:37, 28 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's getting difficult to see nowadays whether something is an actual optical effect or a phones software just simulating one. That may depend on certain setting in you camera app, but since your uploaded file does not have any EXIF or other meta data attached to is, I wouldn't even dare to guess ... El Grafo (talk) 09:29, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's real bokeh, used Open Camera. Gugalcrom123 (talk) 10:29, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Good choice, used to use that too on my previous phone. El Grafo (talk) 08:04, 2 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"Bokeh" does not simply mean "out of focus." It is also not a term that is clearly and unambiguously defined in technical terms, but refers to the more or less harmonious interplay of sharply focused and blurred areas of a photo or photo subject. That's why I don't think your image suggestion is a good example of "bokeh". --Smial (talk) 12:00, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Night Panorama[edit]

Nightime panorama of Nagasaki

I'm kind of new to editing photos. I want to upload photos to Commons and then delete the RAW files on my computer to make space, but I'm afraid of doing bad editing and then losing the raws. Can someone give me some advice on if there is someone wrong with this panorama? I believe for panos like this I should be using a cylindrical projection. I used some dehaze and clarity to try and clean it up from the weather conditions, I hope it still looks natural. I slightly changed the tone curve to remove under/overexposed regions. I mostly relied on the automatic settings to select exposure/contrast/highlights/shadows/whites/blacks. Any advice would be appreciated. Photos of Japan (talk) 11:58, 27 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is very nice, however there are still some overexposed light sources. You should look into HDRI techniques. gugalcrom123: 💬 talk / 🗳️ contribs / 🖼️ uploads 14:22, 27 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not quite the type of advice you're seeking, but perhaps also pertinent: don't delete your Raw files. Demosaicing algorithms are continuously improving, particularly with the advent of AI, but you'll need the original files to fully benefit from them. Your editing techniques and style will also evolve over time, so it's good to have the option to start from scratch --Julesvernex2 (talk) 14:48, 27 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for your replies. I guess I will learn how to do HDRI and get an external drive to transfer my raw files to.Photos of Japan (talk) 10:42, 29 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Some even say that at least TWO external drives are useful to always have independent backups. No data medium lasts forever... --Smial (talk) 14:06, 29 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Photography_critiques&oldid=808115790"