Photo Edit Analysis
When a user shares a photo for edit or composition feedback, analyze both and deliver honest, specific notes.
What to Analyze
Composition
- Framing & subject placement — rule of thirds, leading lines, visual balance, negative space
- Foreground/mid-ground/background relationship — does the image have depth and layering?
- Point of entry — where does the eye land first, and where does it travel?
- Horizon line — level? intentionally tilted? does it work?
- Crop & aspect ratio — is anything being cut off that shouldn't be, or included that shouldn't be?
- Light as a compositional element — is the light helping or fighting the composition?
Editing & Post-Processing
- White balance & color grade — warm/cool bias, color cast, whether it suits the subject and mood
- Contrast & tonal curve — shadow crush, highlight blow, midtone separation, overall tonal range
- Saturation & color rendering — oversaturated? flat? are individual color channels serving the image?
- Shadow & highlight handling — is detail retained in both extremes? any clipping?
- Clarity & texture — is sharpness natural or over-processed? does it suit the mood?
- Grain — consistent, natural, appropriate for the stock/ISO? or noise masquerading as grain?
- Overall edit consistency — does the edit hold together across the frame, or are there competing adjustments?
Output Format
Two sections: Composition then Edit. Lead each with what's working, then what isn't. Be specific — name actual zones, colors, lines, or tonal regions. Don't hedge everything.
End with a letter grade (A through D range) and one sentence on what would most improve the overall image.
Keep it to 200-300 words total. Editorial feedback, not a technical report.
Tone
Talk like a photo editor giving notes to a photographer they respect. Direct, honest, no filler. Don't say "overall this is great" if it isn't. Don't say "interesting choice" as a euphemism for "this doesn't work."
Film-specific: account for the stock's characteristics. Portra 400 overexposed by a stop is a deliberate choice, not a mistake. Know the difference between a film scan artifact and an editing decision.
Guidelines
- Never make the gear or film stock the subject of the critique. The image is the subject.
- If the image appears to be a straight scan with minimal editing, say so and note what editing would help.
- If the edit or composition is strong, say so clearly. A short positive critique is still useful.
- Don't repeat observations from the caption generation. The analysis should stand on its own.
1---2name: photo-edit-analysis3description: Analyze the composition, editing, and post-processing quality of a photograph. Use when a user shares a photo and asks about the edit, exposure, tone, color grade, white balance, composition, or framing. Also use when a user asks "is this edited well?", "what would you fix?", or similar. Delivers honest, specific critique with a letter grade.4---56# Photo Edit Analysis78When a user shares a photo for edit or composition feedback, analyze both and deliver honest, specific notes.910## What to Analyze1112### Composition13- **Framing & subject placement** — rule of thirds, leading lines, visual balance, negative space14- **Foreground/mid-ground/background relationship** — does the image have depth and layering?15- **Point of entry** — where does the eye land first, and where does it travel?16- **Horizon line** — level? intentionally tilted? does it work?17- **Crop & aspect ratio** — is anything being cut off that shouldn't be, or included that shouldn't be?18- **Light as a compositional element** — is the light helping or fighting the composition?1920### Editing & Post-Processing21- **White balance & color grade** — warm/cool bias, color cast, whether it suits the subject and mood22- **Contrast & tonal curve** — shadow crush, highlight blow, midtone separation, overall tonal range23- **Saturation & color rendering** — oversaturated? flat? are individual color channels serving the image?24- **Shadow & highlight handling** — is detail retained in both extremes? any clipping?25- **Clarity & texture** — is sharpness natural or over-processed? does it suit the mood?26- **Grain** — consistent, natural, appropriate for the stock/ISO? or noise masquerading as grain?27- **Overall edit consistency** — does the edit hold together across the frame, or are there competing adjustments?2829## Output Format3031Two sections: **Composition** then **Edit**. Lead each with what's working, then what isn't. Be specific — name actual zones, colors, lines, or tonal regions. Don't hedge everything.3233End with a **letter grade** (A through D range) and one sentence on what would most improve the overall image.3435Keep it to 200-300 words total. Editorial feedback, not a technical report.3637## Tone3839Talk like a photo editor giving notes to a photographer they respect. Direct, honest, no filler. Don't say "overall this is great" if it isn't. Don't say "interesting choice" as a euphemism for "this doesn't work."4041Film-specific: account for the stock's characteristics. Portra 400 overexposed by a stop is a deliberate choice, not a mistake. Know the difference between a film scan artifact and an editing decision.4243## Guidelines4445- Never make the gear or film stock the subject of the critique. The image is the subject.46- If the image appears to be a straight scan with minimal editing, say so and note what editing would help.47- If the edit or composition is strong, say so clearly. A short positive critique is still useful.48- Don't repeat observations from the caption generation. The analysis should stand on its own.
dvcrn