Intentional Lens Flare

[jaydensdaddy]

I shot several backlit images with flash fill, intending the type of lens flare that produces a low contrast image and the flare is evenly distributed over the frame producing a washed out look. What I got is this:









Wikipedia has this to say about the subject:

When a bright light source is shining on the lens but not in its field of view, lens flare appears as a haze that washes out the image and reduces contrast.

The sun was out of the field of view, and the desired effect was visible in the viewfinder, but not captured.

Could it be the lens (Nikon 80-200mm)? Any thoughts, tips?

--



If you find my posts helpful or informative, please consider a donation to my ego fund.

 

[jaydensdaddy]

Hmmm...

The fill flash was on-camera. Could this be the problem?

--



If you find my posts helpful or informative, please consider a donation to my ego fund.

 

[gisle]

There is lens flare in both your pictures (the bright octogonal blob covering the top of the boy's head). However, it does not cover the entire frame, but shows the shape of lens' aperture blades. You say: "the desired effect was visible in the viewfinder, but not captured". When you look through the viewfinder, the aperture is fully open, but it stops down to working aperture when the picture is taken. There's a video on this page that shows the aperture in slow motion: http://dpanswers.com/content/tech_stickyap.php

That being said - if you want to give your pictures a soft, low-contrast look, it is far easier to do this in Photoshop, than relying on inperfections in your lens.
--
– gisle [ See profile/plan for equipment list ]

 

[Barrie Davis]

That being said - if you want to give your pictures a soft, low-contrast look, it is far easier to do this in Photoshop, than relying on imperfections in your lens.

Yes.

Assuming that it is taking place in the lens, (and not just in the viewing system, see other post), bear in mind that the manufacturers of lenses are striving all the time to make imperfections of image quality, like lens flare, NOT happen.

Even if you do succeed in confounding their work of decades, and achieve an effect resembling that which you have seen and getting it to the sensor, strictly speaking it will not be because something went right , but because something that was meant to happen (flare suppression in the lens)... FAILED to work as intended.

For this reason, if some serendipitous previous failure produces a pleasing effect to the eye, it is VERY HARD INDEED to reproduce it in a different time, different place, different lighting, different lens, different photographer, etc....

... not surprisingly so, because it was all an entirely fluky occurrence in the first place.

If you want to control what is happening to the image, instead of simply hoping for more happy accidents, then you need software. Photoshop has some very convincing lens flare effects involving circular flare patterns of different kinds...

.... and there are colour and contrast effects that can be painted on in all editing software.

PS. Flash from the front will have have no effect on visible flare, one way or the other... (unless you fire it square-on to a mirror that's in shot.)
--
Regards,
Baz

"Ahh... But the thing is, they were not just ORDINARY time travellers!"

 

[Barrie Davis]

The sun was out of the field of view, and the desired effect was visible in the viewfinder, but not captured.

That indicates that you are using a dSLR, and the effect you saw was generated in the viewfinder of the camera.. that is, in all those parts of the system above the mirror when in viewing position... (focusing screen, pentaprism/porroprism, eyepiece).

When the shot is taken the internal configuration of the camera changes completely. The mirror swings up and the light goes directly to the sensor through the slit in the shutter. The viewfinder is blacked out and the effect is no longer happening.... and it was never happening in the main chamber of the camera, anyway.

If you want to see exactly what the sensor sees, including flare effects when they happen, you need a camera with live view. This will not make it happen, of course. The main camera chamber is less susceptible to flare than the viewfinder system...

.... but if it does occur, from your manipulation of lens position, lighting etc. then live view will show the effect that will be recorded pretty accurately.
--
Regards,
Baz

"Ahh... But the thing is, they were not just ORDINARY time travellers!"

 

[jaydensdaddy]

I appreciate all of the feedback. I do realize that lens manufacturers design lenses to not produce flare. And what I meant by the effect showing in the viewfinder was that I had intentional placed the sun out of the lens' field of view, but with stray light hitting the lens, as evidenced by the glare I was seeing in the viewfinder. In other words (see wikipedia quote above), I thought I was doing everything right, but kept getting a poor result.

As for adding the flare in post, again, I'm not interested in the common flare effects, but just the washed out look, which I know can also be produced in post, but I've never been able to make it look convincing, at least, not to my eye. So I'd rather produce it in-camera.

Thanks, again. I will keep experimenting.

--



If you find my posts helpful or informative, please consider a donation to my ego fund.

 

[jaydensdaddy]

Below is an example of what I mean about not being able to achieve the same effect in post as would be produced in-camera. Granted, I only spent 2 minutes on it, but it just doesn't look natural (naturally occuring) to my eye.

Maybe, I should be asking if anyone knows of a pp technique or tutorial for producing a better result. I just overlayed a gradient and used screen for the blend mode. But not convincing, imo.





--



If you find my posts helpful or informative, please consider a donation to my ego fund.

 

[Chas P]

I remembered this photo on Flickr and I commented that it looked like it might have been PPd and the fellow says no, OOC so maybe correspond with him if it's the kind of look you're after.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ivolution/5546433434/

I suspect having a big old flash to expose the subject against a thoroughly blown BG might be crucial but I really have no idea. I also remember reading somewhere that lenses specifically misbehave with the sun at around 50 degrees from horizontal which might be worth trying. Also, old uncoated lenses might be worth investigating..
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8189967@N04/

 

[Desmond Ong]

Yes. Nikon is one of them to produce lenses mostly in FX format which incorporated with Nano Crystal Coat technology. The Nano Crystal Coat technolgy basically is to almost but not 100% to reduce ghosting and flare. However, lenses with nano coated are costly than those are not. Take Nikkor 14-24mm f2.8G lense as an example. This wide angle lense has its front element protruded which has a tendency of ghosting and flare to appear when light shine in diagonally. Thankfully, the Nano Crystal Coat helps to almost eliminate it. Here, is the link of how the Nano Crystal Coat has been incorporated and its function.

http://imaging.nikon.com/history/scenes/20/

So its a worth the investment to have lense with Nano Crystal Coating.

I appreciate all of the feedback. I do realize that lens manufacturers design lenses to not produce flare. And what I meant by the effect showing in the viewfinder was that I had intentional placed the sun out of the lens' field of view, but with stray light hitting the lens, as evidenced by the glare I was seeing in the viewfinder. In other words (see wikipedia quote above), I thought I was doing everything right, but kept getting a poor result.

As for adding the flare in post, again, I'm not interested in the common flare effects, but just the washed out look, which I know can also be produced in post, but I've never been able to make it look convincing, at least, not to my eye. So I'd rather produce it in-camera.

Thanks, again. I will keep experimenting.

--



If you find my posts helpful or informative, please consider a donation to my ego fund.

 

[m2photography]

I find that sometimes even the Nano coated lenses can still produce the lens flares. You just have to try different angles with the lens.
--
Michael | Photographer | M2 Photography
http://www.m2-photography.net

 

[mathew crow]

My experience has been that using a flash can result in accentuating these aperture shaped flares while evening out your light so it looks kind of flat. I think that these type of shots tend to look better if you don't use a flash at all. Just spot meter on your subject and let the background blow out. Getting shots with the kind of flare you want can always be tricky, but I've had the most success for my own photos that way. Here's an example of my own, shot with the lens wide-open at f4 and not flash:





--
My Photos:
http://logan5tx.smugmug.com/

 

[jaydensdaddy]

My experience has been that using a flash can result in accentuating these aperture shaped flares while evening out your light so it looks kind of flat. I think that these type of shots tend to look better if you don't use a flash at all. Just spot meter on your subject and let the background blow out. Getting shots with the kind of flare you want can always be tricky, but I've had the most success for my own photos that way. Here's an example of my own, shot with the lens wide-open at f4 and not flash:





--
My Photos:
http://logan5tx.smugmug.com/

Thanks for the feedback.

I remember spot metering and not using flash...I can't remember the outcome. But I must not have liked the results, or I would have stuck with it. At any rate, I will try it again. And maybe a reflector or off-camera flash would work better than an on-camera flash. I will cover all of the scenarios, and see what I get.

Thanks, again.
--



If you find my posts helpful or informative, please consider a donation to my ego fund.

 

[Barrie Davis]

My experience has been that using a flash can result in accentuating these aperture shaped flares while evening out your light so it looks kind of flat.

• Flash on camera cannot influence the appearance of aperture shaped flares, unless it is shone directly onto the lens as any other lightsource in frame, or just out of it.

• Frontal flash is meant to even out lighting. If the result is too flat it indicates the flash was too strong, or wasn't needed at all for that shot.

--
Regards,
Baz

"Ahh... But the thing is, they were not just ORDINARY time travellers!"

 

[AcquiredTaste]

Shoot with a smaller f-stop number and shoot more directly into the sun rather than at an angle. You'll get plenty of lens flare.

 

[jaydensdaddy]

Shoot with a smaller f-stop number and shoot more directly into the sun rather than at an angle. You'll get plenty of lens flare.

The lens flare effect I want is the washed out look. Shooting into the sun to achieve that would contradict what wikipedia says on the subject. From my earlier post:

"When a bright light source is shining on the lens but not in its field of view, lens flare appears as a haze that washes out the image and reduces contrast. "

Most people either shoot in the above manner, with the sun completely out of the frame, or blocked by the subject.

But I plan on exploring all options tomorrow.

Thanks for your feedback.

FWIW, I decided to keep this image (rescued it from the recycle bin), and did a little processing on it. It's not exactly what I envisioned, but it does has a simiilar feel to it:





--



If you find my posts helpful or informative, please consider a donation to my ego fund.

 

[Ted Wilson]

I think you are looking for something like this?





She is in front of a window on the 7th floor with a large building across the street that is lit by direct sunlight. I just exposed for the shadow side of her and let the background blow out. It is very soft low contrast lighting and the great thing about these is I had 0% post processing on them. They are also her favorite images from the shoot.

Ted

Shoot with a smaller f-stop number and shoot more directly into the sun rather than at an angle. You'll get plenty of lens flare.

The lens flare effect I want is the washed out look. Shooting into the sun to achieve that would contradict what wikipedia says on the subject. From my earlier post:

"When a bright light source is shining on the lens but not in its field of view, lens flare appears as a haze that washes out the image and reduces contrast. "

Most people either shoot in the above manner, with the sun completely out of the frame, or blocked by the subject.

--
Ted W.

Whatever you can do, or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has
genius, power and magic in it. - Goethe

 

[jesar]

flare should be embraced , works better than fog, creates the magic, plus is the new thing

it can be brutal (a lateral spot pointed right at the lens, and some metallic reflector) and the effect (and consequences) may also be brutal.

WARNING! Nudity in the picture linked here

 

[CAfotoGirl]

flare should be embraced , works better than fog, creates the magic, plus is the new thing

it can be brutal (a lateral spot pointed right at the lens, and some metallic reflector) and the effect (and consequences) may also be brutal.

WARNING! Nudity in the picture linked here

Your link is broken.

--
Life's too short... shoot me!