Wikipedia:Picture peer review
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
Picture peer review is a staging area for potential Featured Picture Candidates (FPCs) and Valued Picture Candidates (VPCs). This review is a useful "spot check" before making a formal FPC or VPC nomination – a working area where you can get some creative feedback, request help with useful pictures that might need minor editing, or advice with finding the best article that they illustrate – giving that nomination its best possible chance of promotion.
For the specific criteria against which VPCs are judged, see Wikipedia:What is a valued picture?
|
Featured picture tools: |
[edit] InstructionsTo ask for advice on a picture, follow these three steps:
Step 3: Transclude the newly created subpage to the TOP of the Picture peer review list (direct link). |
|
Contents |
Place suggestions and self nominations for Wikipedia Featured Picture Candidates (FPC) and Wikipedia Valued Picture Candidates (VPC) below. Anyone can then comment on a suggestion and recommend improvements. If the suggestion meets FPC guidelines and no significant objections remain, another editor can second the suggestion and move the candidate to the FPC page for voting. If a suggestion doesn't find a seconder within one week, it can be archived in the PPR Archives to make way for new suggestions.
[edit] Suggestions for FPC and VPC
[edit] Pegging
- Creator
- the creator of the image, where possible using the format Seedfeeder
- Nominated by
- Camilo Sanchez (talk) 17:03, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- Comments
- Image was placed on the bad image list. As for the malformed nomination, see bug 16039. MER-C 02:09, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
- I do not understand? Is it a bad image therefore it should not be nominated? Is that what you say?.--Camilo Sanchez (talk) 19:24, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
- MediaWiki:Bad image list is a way of controlling vandalism involving obscene images - it prevents the use of images except where specifically allowed. MER-C 09:41, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
- Seconder
[edit] Tram 2548
A nice shot of a tram in south London
- Articles this image appears in
- Creator
- Sunil060902
- Nominated by
- Sunil060902 (talk) 13:27, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- Comments
- Seconder
[edit] Splash Column
It's a clear, high resolution shot without distracting objects or deception.
- Articles this image appears in
- Splash (fluid mechanics)
- Creator
- Ardo
- Comments
- The lighting is reasonable, but the sharpness is lacking. A pencil makes a good focus aid. You may also need to drop your flash power, decreasing the flash burst time and reducing motion blur. I'm also not sure that Splash (fluid mechanics) is the right article ("Splashes are characterized by transient ballistic flow"). The flow is transient, but not significantly ballistic. Surface tension might be useful, but you'd have to think about the caption. Water drop photography is also an option, but you'd have to write the article. I've done a few myself recently, such as File:Water Dolphin.jpg, File:Orange Coronet.jpg and File:Aqua Spout.jpg. One of my radio triggers has broken so I haven't done any more as I am not happy with the lighting. I note that the shutter speed is 5 seconds. Are you using a trigger circuit of some kind? I was thinking about slapping together a photogate, Schmitt trigger and delay circuit for the purpose. Noodle snacks (talk) 04:50, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, one other thing, you should upload your images to Commons. Noodle snacks (talk) 04:51, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah I used a slow shutter speed and the flash to capture the drop, as I don't have remote triggers quite yet. I have a D60, but I'm using an older flash. A Minolta Auto 118x... The F-stop was low enough that the 5 second exposure (I shortened it on more recent shots, 5 secs is a little unnecessary) didn't capture any light at all, I shot in really low lighting other than the flash. I might need to revise and get some better eqiupment/a better setup before I continue to try these. I've got a few images like the dolphin etc, but like you said, sharpness does lack a little. What do you think of this image? By the way, I'm humbled by your shots, Noodle snacks. Kudos. Ard0 (Talk - Contribs) 14:00, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, one other thing, you should upload your images to Commons. Noodle snacks (talk) 04:51, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- On more mundane matters, composition itself would probably be lacking for FPC. I feel that the drop reaches too high in the frame and the ripples are unbalanced being cutoff at left far more than at right. Ideally you'd probably want about as much ripples at right on both sides. For a repeatable shot like this, these things wouldn't be overlooked by many. --jjron (talk) 08:17, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- Seconder
[edit] Red Mountain Pass
Beautiful shot taken during a drive between Silverton, CO and Ouray, CO. The season is nice; early summer colors with some snow remaining. Slight tone mapping to bring in the clouds.
- Articles this image appears in
- San_Juan_Skyway Red_Mountain_Pass
- Creator
- User:eleaf
- Comments
- Very nice photo, but I honestly doubt it is high enough quality to pass at FPC. Size is small (at 1200 x 800 it does meet requirements, but bigger is usually expected for 'landscape' type photos). Sharpness, even at this size, is ordinary - I'm guessing this is taken using the kit lens? And the sky is probably a bit too bright, including some completely blown whites. Overall I don't think it would quite make it, sorry. --jjron (talk) 14:35, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
-
- Original file is 10 megapixels. Shot with a 24mm 2.8 prime lens on a 40D. In the original shot, the sky is completely white; I tone mapped the sky down about two stops to compensate, anything more aggressive looked a bit unnatural to me --User:eleaf —Preceding undated comment added 21:52, 7 June 2009 (UTC).
- Perhaps something's gone bad in the downsizing then, cos I would expect better from that lens/body combination. Could be worth retrying though on another edit. Re the sky, it's just one of those things - you might only be passing through here and basically get one go at the shot, but that may be the wrong time of day/year. If you can't go back at a more congenial time then the photo may be good in general, but people at FPC are unlikely to make exceptions for what are generally considered 'repeatable' photos. --jjron (talk) 07:36, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the suggestions! Eleaf
- Perhaps something's gone bad in the downsizing then, cos I would expect better from that lens/body combination. Could be worth retrying though on another edit. Re the sky, it's just one of those things - you might only be passing through here and basically get one go at the shot, but that may be the wrong time of day/year. If you can't go back at a more congenial time then the photo may be good in general, but people at FPC are unlikely to make exceptions for what are generally considered 'repeatable' photos. --jjron (talk) 07:36, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
- Original file is 10 megapixels. Shot with a 24mm 2.8 prime lens on a 40D. In the original shot, the sky is completely white; I tone mapped the sky down about two stops to compensate, anything more aggressive looked a bit unnatural to me --User:eleaf —Preceding undated comment added 21:52, 7 June 2009 (UTC).
- Seconder
[edit] Picture Peer Review Archives
Picture Peer Review Archives Mainpage
|
Please cut and paste nominations to be archived from the Picture peer review mainpage to the top of the appropriate archive page, creating a new archive (by nomination date) when necessary.
|
[edit] Pictures that need placing on an appropriate article
If you have an excellent picture, but can't think where to put it, add it to the section below. Similarly if you need help in writing a new article on the subject of a photo, request it below. If you are unsure of what plant or animal is in a picture please ask at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science.
[edit] Pictures that need moving from other Wikipedias
If you have found a good picture on another language Wikipedia that would benefit the English Wikipedia, suggest it below. The image may need confirmation on its identification and assistance with translating the caption and moving to Commons before placing on the equivalent English language article.
