name	photo-edit-analysis
description	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.

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.

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

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.

photo-edit-analysis