Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:GRACE-FO Launch (NHQ201805220019).jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

File:GRACE-FO Launch (NHQ201805220019).jpg

[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Dec 2024 at 22:24:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket launch
Discussion about technical details
  • I wonder why Bill Ingalls (given that he is/was a professional photographer) did not pay more attention to details, both in the composition (which he could have checked calmly before the start) and in the post-processing (which is done later). We can accept the leaning verticals, but the cropped flowers at the bottom are unsatisfying (either there should be more of them in the frame or they should have been cut off completely), the CAs are obvious and (given the low resolution) quite prominent. And the whole image, which has been underexposed to preserve the highlights, should have been brightened in post-processing. Given the incredible expenditure necessary for space missions, one could expect a bit more care from the photographer, too. – Aristeas (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
     Comment I'm pretty sure this specific type of picture is taken remotely. The focal length is 16mm in full frame, it's unlikely a person would be allowed this close to a rocket launch. Chromatic aberration might have been corrected, I agree. I know what you mean about preservation of highlights and underexposure, but I think the key to this picture being "wow" are the dramatic steam clouds. To make them dramatic, you need the darker shadows within them. Even if you correct the levels to enhance the dark foreground with flowers, you might make the vapor cloud less dramatic and therefore the photo less "wow". Of course, it's possible to make a feathered selection of the grass/flowers area and correct it while preserving dramatic vapor, but I'm not sure it's allowed for journalistic type of photos from NASA. Tupungato (talk) 13:14, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
     Comment Of course I did not want to say that this is a bad photo; it has much “wow” and high educational value. I just stumbled over a certain disparity between the incredible expenditure and expense for such a space mission on the one hand and a certain lack of care for the details shown by the photographer on the other hand. – You are certainly right that this photo has been taken remotely; and I would also assume that the camera was set to continuous shooting (burst mode), so the photographer triggered remotely the start of the continuous series and this is just one photo selected from that series. That’s all fine. I just meant that whoever has placed the camera on the tripod (or whatever) before could have thought a little bit longer about the framing. You are also completely right that the underexposure is intentional and correct in order to get a good image of the dramatic steam clouds. I just think that whoever has processed the raw image file later could have spent a little bit more time to remove the CAs and to lift the exposure again, just to achieve a more realistic impression. It should not even be necessary to make a feathured selection of the dark parts; just increasing the exposure by e.g. 0.25 EV, reducing the highlights by 0.25 EV and increasing the brightness of the shadows by 0.5 EV or so would already improve the image without sacrificing the clouds or adulterating the realistic impression. No offence, I really appreciate your selection of this photo and (as said above) just stumbled about the details. – Aristeas (talk) 11:15, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:GRACE-FO_Launch_(NHQ201805220019).jpg&oldid=965044749"