User:TotallyNottheroc/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
The Article I have Chosen to evaluate is Photographic lighting.

I have chosen this particular article because i am a an experienced photographer and videographer with qualifications like video work for the History channel, Carbon TV, and more as well as having 9 years of experience working in Photography Studios. I know that Photography is an art form and thus subject to personal tastes. However, there are many different lighting patterns used in photography and film industry that have become standards and the article has fallen short of many of these lighting patterns.

I found the introductory sentence to be accurate to the topic. However, It could go more in to detail about how both the presence and absence of light, as well as color all come into play in this article. I found that the introduction Did not mention each section of the article which would have been better so that upon reading the introduction i would know what all the article includes. However, for the most part i could not find any extra information in the Lead than what was actually in the article. I found that the lead could have gone more into detail than it did.

I found the information in the article to be relevant to the topic. For the most part it seemed to be up to date and accurate, as well as being informative and helpful. As new technology evolves and is invented however it will need to be updated on a constant basis. I found a few things i believe the article was missing such as "Lighting Patterns" However, the information it did give was very helpful and accurate.

For the most part Photographic lighting tends to be bias towards either still photography or video. I found that this article tended to walk the middle line between the two. Because this was a mostly informative article it tended to just relay the information instead of attempting to convince the reader in one direction or the other. Overall, the article tends to take a non-biased point of view.

Backing the facts with links to more information is something this article tended for the most part to do very well. All the links that i checked leading to more information were backed up with well known sources or literature. The given links linked to information that is relevant and accurate to rules of lighting. for the most part it seemed that all sources were current however i believe that there could have been more sources given than there was.

I found the article to be well written and both easy and fun to read. It relayed the information in a way that was both easy to understand, and clear to envision and learn. I did not find any grammatical errors however that does not mean that there wasn't any. I think the article could have been organized a little better than it was. It seemed chaotic, and out of order. Some sections could have been broken down and elaborated on much more than they were.

I would have liked to have more visuals in the article than it did. I was only able to find one picture and it was not really relatable to the content. The one picture that was shown had no captioning. while it did follow the copyright rules of Wikipedia it did in no way relate to the topics and wasn't even in well-layed out place in the article.

While there was some good information given in the article i believe it was created by someone who had little to no experience in the topic only information found online. It seems that there was little to know planning involved in the creation of this article. I could not find a talk page to see and understand the thinking behind the creation of this article. I believe what happened is that the person creating this article never finished it but instead published it unfinished.

Currently the article is published, However it is flagged for having multiple problems. I think the strongest part of the article is the part written on Natural and artificial lighting. Both are important to understand and i think its good that it goes into detail the way it does. there are many ways the article could be improved, first of all it isn't completed so i believe the first step would be to finish the entire article and then move on to ironing out the final details.