Wikipedia:Picture peer review/Hydrangea arborescens annabelle

There are no high quality photos on wikipedia of a this type of hydrangea and I think this image clearly visualizes the flower.

This looks well done. I like how the shaded part emphasizes the inner structure of the stems, while the sunny part emphasizes the blossoms. There appears to be some chromatic aberration at the edges, most noticeable on the left side. I'm not sure how that would affect its chances at FPC. Fletcher (talk) 20:20, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is that just cause that area is out of focus? (Giligone (talk) 22:59, 3 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Could be... I wasn't sure. Fletcher (talk) 23:46, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Think its worth a shot at FPC or would they just rip it appart for the reason you've mentioned? (Giligone (talk) 15:16, 4 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]

I think that, even more so than the chromatic abberation, lighting and sharpness would be major complaints. The lighting is very harsh, and though there is significant shadow detail, I find it distracting. A later time of day would likely be better. If you can get this sharper (it looks front-focussed) and with better light, I think this whould stand a chance. If you decide to retake it, try a different angle—the out-of-focus blooms are probably better not in the frame. Thegreenj 20:50, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]