Comment What would you think of a less centered crop that kept the cub's back and placed the face at right? Seems like a good instance to use the rule of thirds. Durova284 16:13, 25 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Agreed, the square image doesn't look as good as one that crops the right side while keeping the back.
Diliff |
(Talk)(Contribs) 11:12, 26 July 2009 (UTC)reply
I will remove the square edit and put up another one as you suggested by tomorrow. --
Muhammad(talk) 17:37, 26 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Support Took the liberty of a black point adjustment. Shows the mantle mentioned in the article well, so a head shot has definite EV.
Noodle snacks (
talk) 11:07, 26 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Yeah, Muhammad, I think perhaps your monitor might need an adjustment, since the last couple of images have seemed slightly overexposed/lacking contrast. This one isn't as noticable as the boy on the bicycle though IMO.
Diliff |
(Talk)(Contribs) 11:12, 26 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Yeah probably since I am on a different computer and monitor now. Thanks --
Muhammad(talk) 17:37, 26 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Diliff's edit looks wonderful on my system. That plus the crop and this will really be a winner. Good capture. :) Durova285 21:26, 26 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Support edit 2 :) Durova285 05:15, 27 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Support edit 2. Original is very good, but since the foliage in the background is not in focus and doesn’t give any kind of geographical indicators, I support the picture that makes the cub the main focus. Normally, I would support the picture that not only shows the animal, but also any of its natural habitat in the greatest detail.
Zulualpha (
talk) 14:23, 28 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Comment What would you think of a less centered crop that kept the cub's back and placed the face at right? Seems like a good instance to use the rule of thirds. Durova284 16:13, 25 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Agreed, the square image doesn't look as good as one that crops the right side while keeping the back.
Diliff |
(Talk)(Contribs) 11:12, 26 July 2009 (UTC)reply
I will remove the square edit and put up another one as you suggested by tomorrow. --
Muhammad(talk) 17:37, 26 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Support Took the liberty of a black point adjustment. Shows the mantle mentioned in the article well, so a head shot has definite EV.
Noodle snacks (
talk) 11:07, 26 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Yeah, Muhammad, I think perhaps your monitor might need an adjustment, since the last couple of images have seemed slightly overexposed/lacking contrast. This one isn't as noticable as the boy on the bicycle though IMO.
Diliff |
(Talk)(Contribs) 11:12, 26 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Yeah probably since I am on a different computer and monitor now. Thanks --
Muhammad(talk) 17:37, 26 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Diliff's edit looks wonderful on my system. That plus the crop and this will really be a winner. Good capture. :) Durova285 21:26, 26 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Support edit 2 :) Durova285 05:15, 27 July 2009 (UTC)reply
Support edit 2. Original is very good, but since the foliage in the background is not in focus and doesn’t give any kind of geographical indicators, I support the picture that makes the cub the main focus. Normally, I would support the picture that not only shows the animal, but also any of its natural habitat in the greatest detail.
Zulualpha (
talk) 14:23, 28 July 2009 (UTC)reply