SUPPORT US. If mindat.org is important to you, click here to donate to our Fall 2019 fundraiser!
Log InRegister
Home PageAbout MindatThe Mindat ManualHistory of MindatCopyright StatusWho We AreContact UsAdvertise on Mindat
Donate to MindatCorporate SponsorshipSponsor a PageSponsored PagesMindat AdvertisersAdvertise on Mindat
Learning CenterWhat is a mineral?The most common minerals on earthInformation for EducatorsMindat ArticlesThe ElementsBooks & Magazines
Minerals by PropertiesMinerals by ChemistryAdvanced Locality SearchRandom MineralRandom LocalitySearch by minIDLocalities Near MeSearch ArticlesSearch GlossaryMore Search Options
Search For:
Mineral Name:
Locality Name:
Keyword(s):
 
The Mindat ManualAdd a New PhotoRate PhotosLocality Edit ReportCoordinate Completion ReportAdd Glossary Item
Mining CompaniesStatisticsUsersMineral MuseumsMineral Shows & EventsThe Mindat DirectoryDevice Settings
Photo SearchPhoto GalleriesNew Photos TodayNew Photos YesterdayMembers' Photo GalleriesPast Photo of the Day GalleryMineral Photography

GeneralWulfenite in User Gallery Only

19th Aug 2019 03:33 BSTTama Higuchi

05112160015661447897785.jpg
Hello all!  Yesterday I posted this photo for approval, and I noticed that it was designated to "User Gallery Only," rather than to the public galleries.  I was just curious as to why; if there is anything wrong with the photo, I would love some feedback so I can improve on my mineral photography for future submissions!  Thank you :-)

19th Aug 2019 09:15 BSTThomas Lühr Expert

Hello Tama
In my opinion, the lighting could be the reason why. The right side of your specimen looks quite dark. Better you use a second light source from front right or use a lightbox/tent.

19th Aug 2019 09:30 BSTJolyon Ralph Founder

Please in future always comment on the PHOTO page, do not post messages about individual photos in GENERAL or the messages will probably get deleted!

We currently have 660 photos of wulfenite from this locality, so for new photos to be added at the public gallery level the quality threshold is much higher than it would be for a less common species.

In this case your lighting needs to be adjusted and the depth of field could be better, right now only the very closest photos are sharp, even the group in the center that are further back are slightly out of focus. A good photo doesn't need everything in focus, but those crystals in the central field of view within the photo should be, and not all are in your photo.

19th Aug 2019 10:00 BSTFrank K. Mazdab Manager

I don't know what the original reviewer's criteria were. The lighting is a bit dark but not terribly so in my opinion... while the right side is a bit over-shadowed, the left and center look quite nice against the darkened background. The reflective (and dusty?) tabletop is a bit distracting, as are the cotton fibers still attached to the left edge of the specimen... perhaps all that's a bit nit-picky, but I have to admit my eye was drawn to those features as soon as I looked at the photo (but, I've also probably become rather spoiled by all the professionally-staged photomicrographs we see here everyday). And the photo is very slightly out-of-focus (but only noticeable when zoomed in). It could be that these very minor imperfections, coupled with the already ~680 photos (I think) of wulfenite from this locality, just made the criteria for inclusion in the public gallery a bit steeper.

You can hope the original reviewer comments here (or PMs you) with their specific concerns, or alternatively, if you still have the sample, you can simply re-snap the photo and replace the present one with a resubmission (& addressing some of these issues). Or, you can hope another reviewer disagrees with the first and changes the setting, but I suspect most won't do that out of deference to the primary reviewer's expertise and experience.

19th Aug 2019 10:57 BSTUwe Kolitsch Manager

I think the photo is fine. Now site-wide.

19th Aug 2019 12:16 BSTJolyon Ralph Founder

I don't think that was the right decision for the reasons listed above. The photographer asked how to improve the photo, and we gave good feedback. I think in this case we should respect the original reviewer's decision, which is why I have reverted it back to user-only

19th Aug 2019 13:22 BSTTama Higuchi

Thomas, Jolyon, and Frank, thank you so much for taking the time to give me valuable feedback!  I actually thought the relative darkness might’ve been what put it in user-only, but I hadn’t thought of the DOF or commonality of the mineral.  Thank you for pointing those out as well.  I’ll apply this advice next time I take photos :-)

(Also, apologies for posting in the wrong section!  Will post in Photos time.)
 
Mineral and/or Locality  
Mindat.org is an outreach project of the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization. Public Relations by Blytheweigh.
Copyright © mindat.org and the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy 1993-2019, except where stated. Most political location boundaries are © OpenStreetMap contributors. Mindat.org relies on the contributions of thousands of members and supporters.
Privacy Policy - Terms & Conditions - Contact Us Current server date and time: September 19, 2019 15:48:13
Go to top of page