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!

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



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


Images of former building of the turbine and compressor station of Dietl's spinning mill 1912-1914

[edit]

The next image to judge. I wait for your opinions and sugestions for this photo. Is enough to be QI, VI, and FP? KrzysztofPoplawski (talk) 17:59, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Probably QI, but you'd need to fix the artifacts/weirdness to either side of the lamppost/wire where they vertically cross the sky. Not likely to pass FPC, though, for a few reasons:
  • the cropped lamppost/wires crossing the top-middle are distracting. I'd have to see an uncropped version to see if it's an improvement or if they're just too prominent in the composition.
  • The light is good for detail, but not good for the "wow factor" expected at FPC.
  • Composition is a bit unbalanced. Works for an infobox picture on Wikipedia, but it's quite right-heavy and top-heavy, with an unclear reason for the left crop. The top crop is too tight for the amount of space you have at the bottom, and it could use more space to "breathe" at least on the right, and probably on the left.
  • The subject just might not be a realistic subject for FPC, with the road in the foreground, wires/poles between the camera and the building, etc. For a building that doesn't have a very unique look to it, the photo itself has to be really spectacular. In other words, FPC would be a very high bar for anyone taking a photo of this subject. — Rhododendrites talk18:56, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for all this information. It helps me to understand better FPC. KrzysztofPoplawski (talk) 02:49, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]