I'm just curious.
(I don't plan on doing any reviews any time soon.)
Personally I like about three to ten photos in the typical flashlight review on BLF.
Some reviewers post many more photos, and that doesn't really appeal to me.
I mean, I appreciate all the reviews on BLF, but I wonder how many photos is enough for everyone else.
When I say photos, I'm talking about for one flashlight.
If the review has more than one flashlight, then more photos might be expected.
And I'm not counting graphs as photos.
It depends on the quality and usefulness of the photos. If they’re high quality comparison and disassembly photos then the more the better. It’s also nice if they’re appropriately sized.
One photo of the packaging is plenty for me, just to see whether it looks nice enough to give the light as a gift without repackaging first.
Oh, I didn't even think of disassembly photos.
That does make a difference for me.
I like plenty of photos, and lots of them! 
the more, the better. I’d rather have too many pictures than a detail that was missed.
Also, the people on BLF have a keen eye to spot very interesting technical elements and ask relevant questions. Pictures help a lot.
20-25 would be good.
It’s less amount, more size that bothers me. If I click a link and it slowly starts loading in a gb of 30 photos I just close the page.
Very handy to have a link to a full size image off site - but a pain if people just slap them on here full fat, or worse still if they don’t resize them and they end up going off the page by 50%.
Not a complaint though, I appreciate anyone doing a review so long as it is genuine and not produced to get them more free lights off as many suppliers as possible by basically not telling the truth, or clouding it.
Here is something I would like to discuss with a bit more detail (sorry if some questions are too basic for the pros on here)
- Which elements of a flashlight should be photographed and how?
- What are the best ways to create beam shots (i.e. with an iPhone, with an Android,…)?
I will use this thread as a “guideline” for my next reviews!
I really like to see and do reviews with many photos (both useful and “fancy” photos).
I realize that I try to take as many photos as I can to show how a light “is” and “behaves” (beams), but then the comments are below 0 
So…maybe I’ll start putting only the “needed” photos.
Thanks for the innitiative of this thread RC 
I like to see a side shot, switch or button, straight into the business end, threads, a couple of profile shots, and a couple of shots of the light in hands or with other things to help me size it.
Pics of the springs and driver, charging port (if present), led(s) on board, are nice, but not necessarily what I decide on.
Beamshots are nice, but there is no standard to them, what looks nice outside can look terrible inside, so it’s hard to judge sometimes.
I don’t really care for pics of the packaging, as I’m not going to keep it.
I do like it if there’s a link to a video that is short, to the point, and doesn’t have fancy graphics or animated intros.
I’m not everyone, and I don’t expect anyone to conform to my expectations, this is just what I’m looking for in review photos.
10-12 for "regular" light
+5 for breakdown
+3 for comparison with other models of similar class?
+4-8 for beamshots
+1-3 for creative shots.
Good topic.
Just enough and maybe a few more…
Two or three to show the whole light.
I want to see shots that show any unique features. However many that takes.
A look at the end cap spring and head contacts. A shot of the LED arrangement. Charging port. Included accessories. Switch. Internals if it comes apart. Instructions (if relevant). The box if it needs mentioning. PWM if an O-Scope is handy.
Size comparison to whatever is relevant. A shot in the hand if appropriate. Battery - if included or unique.
Beam shots are always welcome. Compared to a well known light(s) is nice. So hard to do well (at least for me).
I do think some reviews have way too many photos that really don’t add to the review. However nice the photos are.
Looking at a light from every possible angle, in different settings, near and far, just makes me skip past that section.
Also, if the link is to a full res image, it just wastes bandwidth.
If those 20 glamour shots slow the page load time. I get annoyed.
Do we really need anything more than 1024 pixels in the embedded image link?
If I want to zoom in, I can always follow the link to the host site.
Very few offenders these days.
But for heavens sake use the % width option to keep it in the frame. And limit vertical shots to something other than full width - if appropriate.
Not ragging on anyone in particular. Just my thoughts.
All the Best,
Jeff
I would say just show me the basic design, size, shape, front and side view, then 1 or 2 shots of something unique if it has something unique…
maybe include a caliper shot showing dimensions
I do not want to see every knurl, o-ring, spring, or thread (even if happens to be dryish or gritty).
I also find tint, pattern and ‘look-at-this-tree-way-off’ shots to be not very useful.
wle
Oh, and for video reviews. I have three suggestions.
Tripod - Tripod - Tripod.
Nothing will get me to close a video faster than someone trying to open a box with one hand holding the camera bobbing about in the other.
If there is an intro or background music, it should be LOWER in volume than the dialogue.
Contestant narration volume. Don’t make me have to constantly fuss with the volume to hear what you are saying.
And a 45 second intro is only clever once. After that, it’s just old.
All the Best,
Jeff
Often, I think, The more complete the review, the less likely it is to get questions.
And I really think that if you see a review you like, you should post a positive comment.
Positive feedback is so easy to do, and encourages the OP to make more reviews.
I’m guilty as charged in this.
All the Best,
Jeff
I Hi-Jack, therefore I am.
Take a look at the reviews you like or that others praise in the comments.
See what works for them and do likewise. If something seems missing from their reviews, include it in yours.
Be aware how they pose the light and most important, how lighting is used in the image.
Some of the folks here take gorgeous shots of lights.
Cameras?
Phones do pretty well these days. Don’t think the type matters much.
Many, however, can’t be set for a fixed color balance, f/stop, ISO, and shutter speed.
This is perhaps most relevant to beam shots.
Most phones have wide angle lenses. This can distort the image perspective a bit if shooting close. But again, many snaps with a phone look just fine to me.
Many point and shoots do have manual controls and would be the next step up the food chain. Be sure it has a good macro mode. Many do not.
A DSLR camera with a fixed focal length macro lens is probably the standard other options must be measured against.
Full frame or APS-C/DX matters not - thinks I. Except for the added apparent depth of field with the smaller sensor (and the lower cost).
Something close to normal eyeball perspective in focal length or a bit longer for the lens.
This can be had used for not a great deal of money if someone wanted to drop down that rabbit hole.
But Great Googly-Moogly, if you think the flashlight equipment fetish is $$$, Just price the latest and greatest DSLRs and lenses!
Gobs of pixels is irrelevant for Web viewing. Full HD is only 2mp after all.
The extra pixels only come in handy for framing the shot.
The more pixels to play with the less tight the framing needs to be.
But like Lumens, once you have more to play with, it’s hard to go back…
But, but, for all that’s good and holy, do not link to 36mp images. Too much bandwidth.
Shots taken with a super wide angle lens distort the perspective at short distances. OK for glamour shots, but don’t really reflect how the light looks for real.
When looking at distant beam shots for throw, a wide angle lenses fail to reveal useful info.
I’d rather see a telephoto of a given distant object as illuminated by the different lights.
For general beam shots, a lens that is close to eyeball perspective I think would be more informative.
If the light is super floody, then a wide angle may be the only way to see the whole beam at closer distances.
Lighting is more important than the camera.
There is plenty of info on lighting on the Web at photo sites.
Indoors, a big softbox/umbrella/??, or just a ceiling bounce makes a world of difference. As opposed to on camera flash. Add some direct light to make the highlights sparkle.
Getting the light off the camera is the first step to getting a good image. Flood that sucker with light.
Outdoors, fill flash can really help cut down on harsh lighting conditions and fill in the holes the sun leaves behind.
Learn to shoot in manual mode. You be in control of the f/stop and shutter speed.
Easy to master in the digital age. The histogram is your friend.
Shoot in RAW and learn to post process in software. There are many excellent applications.
Adobe PS is expensive, hard to master, and not needed for most.
GIMP is free, perhaps harder to master, and has almost all the PS tricks.
Darktable is free, does most of what a photog need, and is easier to get a handle on (perhaps).
Then there are the 8 zillion (or a few more) other apps that edit images.
Yer ’pays’yer money (or not) and takes your chances.
Just make sure the software can open the RAW format your camera uses.
Take a look at your edits on different systems if you can. See what seems to work best for the majority of screens.
A color calibrated monitor is the last step in the editing chain.
Just be aware that most screens are too blue and over bright. And that’s what most people will use to view your images.
Perhaps the most important thing is to just try.
Post and ask for critique on your images.
If you are brave enough, go to a photo site and post some images (I’m not (brave enough that is!)). You will get LOTS of suggestions.
Everything gets easier with practice.
We now return your thread to the OPs originally scheduled program.
All the Best,
Jeff
i would say the more the better.
wow jeff51, thanks for all the input and details. you seem really knowledgeable in this space.
Nah,
Just home and bored. Also been playing with cameras and film since about 1963.
If you want more info, start a thread and I’m sure other better photographers will chime in.
Also on the Web, look for tips on product / ebay photography. Which is basically what we do here.
All the Best,
Jeff
Oh, and depending if it’s a particularly moddable light, a caliper showing sizes is useful if you are thinking of buying one and upgrading it. Driver sizes, thread sizes , glass sizes etc