Comment The composition, focus, and depth of field look excellent. I particularly like the glop of mud on top of the boar's snout. This critter looks happy as a pig in (cough, ahem). Yet the foreground appears to be heavily artifacted and there's an unexplained horizontal smear at lower right.
DurovaCharge!03:51, 19 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Could be a camera smear...hard to say. I've asked the photographer. In the mean time, I've added another crop that addresses it by removing it. Seems a pity to destroy the composition though.
pschemp |
talk04:53, 19 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Oppose Support Croppedthe crop is a bit wide, giving too much out of focus space at full res. Plus, it doesn't really add much to the article it's in; the picture at the top of the page is of the same quality and more encyclopedic composition. I like the composition much better with this crop. Thanks!
Clegs (
talk)
04:02, 19 January 2008 (UTC)reply
I respectfully disagree, the other picture (right) seems much less interesting - especially composition-wise - However perhaps the crop suits you better?
pschemp |
talk04:53, 19 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Support Edit 4 or Alternative— High quality, natural environment. It captures contact with the water without blur; the alternative also displays the boar's profile perfectly. Nice.-
DMCer™07:13, 19 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Comment The composition, focus, and depth of field look excellent. I particularly like the glop of mud on top of the boar's snout. This critter looks happy as a pig in (cough, ahem). Yet the foreground appears to be heavily artifacted and there's an unexplained horizontal smear at lower right.
DurovaCharge!03:51, 19 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Could be a camera smear...hard to say. I've asked the photographer. In the mean time, I've added another crop that addresses it by removing it. Seems a pity to destroy the composition though.
pschemp |
talk04:53, 19 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Oppose Support Croppedthe crop is a bit wide, giving too much out of focus space at full res. Plus, it doesn't really add much to the article it's in; the picture at the top of the page is of the same quality and more encyclopedic composition. I like the composition much better with this crop. Thanks!
Clegs (
talk)
04:02, 19 January 2008 (UTC)reply
I respectfully disagree, the other picture (right) seems much less interesting - especially composition-wise - However perhaps the crop suits you better?
pschemp |
talk04:53, 19 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Support Edit 4 or Alternative— High quality, natural environment. It captures contact with the water without blur; the alternative also displays the boar's profile perfectly. Nice.-
DMCer™07:13, 19 January 2008 (UTC)reply