Wikipedia:Picture peer review/Heermann's Gull
I think this is a great shot of an uncommon (around here anyway) gull; appears in Heermann's Gull (on both EN and FR), created by me, Dante Alighieri | Talk.
This photo has been cropped and retouched. The original photo can be seen here.
- Nominate and support. - Dante Alighieri | Talk 01:41, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments:
- It's a tough call, but I would say that it probably wouldn't make it, though I'm hesitant about that. The main problems I have are that the head is somewhat out of focus, and the highlights on the head are blown. Though otherwise I don't see any more major faults. --Pharaoh Hound 13:03, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
- Well, if the head were in focus, you'd be complaining that the wings were slightly out of focus. ;) About the blown highlights... what's the 'right' way in Photoshop to check that? I know there's a tool to do it, but I'm "bad" at Photoshop. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 18:09, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
- A smaller depth of field would be ideal for trying to get the whole bird in focus. Failing that I would prefer to have the head in focus rather that the wing. As for the highlights, I put the image through Adobe photoshop elements (a program with which I'm intimately familiar) quickly and, they seem largely correctible. I can do a detailed fix if you want, that way the rest of the image won't be affected. --Pharaoh Hound 19:29, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
- Oops, did I say "smaller DOF". I ment larger! --Pharaoh Hound 23:01, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
- Smaller, larger... I was able to deduce your meaning. ;) Should I upload the original uncropped (as well as un-retouched) jpg? I'm guessing we'll want the fewest re-savings as possible, each time you save a jpeg, the compression artifacts get worse, right? --Dante Alighieri | Talk 16:04, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
- That would work well. I can almost definately redo the modifications that you added. --Pharaoh Hound 16:58, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
- A smaller depth of field would be ideal for trying to get the whole bird in focus. Failing that I would prefer to have the head in focus rather that the wing. As for the highlights, I put the image through Adobe photoshop elements (a program with which I'm intimately familiar) quickly and, they seem largely correctible. I can do a detailed fix if you want, that way the rest of the image won't be affected. --Pharaoh Hound 19:29, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
- Well, if the head were in focus, you'd be complaining that the wings were slightly out of focus. ;) About the blown highlights... what's the 'right' way in Photoshop to check that? I know there's a tool to do it, but I'm "bad" at Photoshop. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 18:09, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
Seconder: