Help! Why are there concentric rings in my photos?

[Platographer]

Below is a 4MP jpeg export of a raw file from Lightroom. As you can see, there is a very nasty and obvious banding-like effect of some sort that looks like concentric rings. This is not jpeg compression because it was visible in Lightroom. I included a second version with boosted contrast to make the problem even more obvious, but clearly it is present without boosting contrast. I used a Sony A7Riv with a Tamron 28-200mm f2.8-5.6 along with a PolarPro Summit ND filter kit. I may have had a PolarPro UV filter on the lens as well, but I forget. Please help figure out what caused this and, most importantly, how to prevent it from happening again. Thank you.

 

[Leswick II]

Your image/es will start to pasteurize when you reduce your jpg (in PP) lower than certain threshold. I try to keep mine appx 1400-1450 pixels on long end and things are acceptable. You might want to test and see what works for you.

 

[Platographer]

Your image/es will start to pasteurize when you reduce your jpg (in PP) lower than certain threshold. I try to keep mine appx 1400-1450 pixels on long end and things are acceptable. You might want to test and see what works for you.

As I said in my original post, this is not from jpeg compression because it's just as visible in the raw file in Lightroom. It also should be obvious that it is not posterization because the rings are not due to a color transition.

I did some research and the closest issue I could find is Newton's Rings. I should add that photos from the same shoot taken with my Sony 16-35mm GM f2.8 lens do not have the ring issue while all photos taken during that shoot with my Tamron 28-200mm that I checked so far do have the rings to various degrees of severity, including those I did not use ND filters for. I do think I had a PolarPro UV filter on my Tamron 28-200mm and Sony 16-35mm GM for most or all of the shots.

 

[Tom Axford]

It looks to me like some sort of posterisation effect due to over-processing the image.

What does the original image (straight from the camera, or default processing in Lightroom) look like?

Large areas of uniform blue sky are prone to posterisation if they are heavily processed.

 

[Tom Axford]

Your image/es will start to pasteurize when you reduce your jpg (in PP) lower than certain threshold. I try to keep mine appx 1400-1450 pixels on long end and things are acceptable. You might want to test and see what works for you.

As I said in my original post, this is not from jpeg compression because it's just as visible in the raw file in Lightroom. It also should be obvious that it is not posterization because the rings are not due to a color transition.

Posterisation can occur without any change of colour. It can also be an abrupt change in lightness.

I did some research and the closest issue I could find is Newton's Rings. I should add that photos from the same shoot taken with my Sony 16-35mm GM f2.8 lens do not have the ring issue while all photos taken during that shoot with my Tamron 28-200mm that I checked so far do have the rings to various degrees of severity, including those I did not use ND filters for. I do think I had a PolarPro UV filter on my Tamron 28-200mm and Sony 16-35mm GM for most or all of the shots.

Newton's rings occur when there are two glass surfaces almost touching - that seems very unlikely!

 

[Platographer]

It looks to me like some sort of posterisation effect due to over-processing the image.

What does the original image (straight from the camera, or default processing in Lightroom) look like?

Large areas of uniform blue sky are prone to posterisation if they are heavily processed.

It's definitely not posterization. In some of the photos it is visible in Lightroom before making any adjustments, although bringing the exposure down makes it more obvious. Also, this effect is completely absent from the photos shot with the Sony 16-35mm GM lens, no matter what I do in Lightroom.

 

[smithim]

It doesn't look like posterization to me - as you say, it has more the look of Newton's rings or some other interference pattern.

Personally, I suspect either one or a combination of filters. Have you tried the same sort of things without any filters at all?

 

[Platographer]

Your image/es will start to pasteurize when you reduce your jpg (in PP) lower than certain threshold. I try to keep mine appx 1400-1450 pixels on long end and things are acceptable. You might want to test and see what works for you.

As I said in my original post, this is not from jpeg compression because it's just as visible in the raw file in Lightroom. It also should be obvious that it is not posterization because the rings are not due to a color transition.

Posterisation can occur without any change of colour. It can also be an abrupt change in lightness.

But look at the photo. The dark rings radiate from the center throughout the whole photo (not just the sky) in a fairly uniform manner. This clearly is not due to color or luminosity transitions present in the scene. I don't remember ever seeing noticeable posterization before in a 14-bit raw file. It seems extremely obvious to me that posterization can be ruled out.

 

[HappyCampers]

that is a weird effect, my first thought was about unwanted reflections somewhere, possibly outside the lens as it is a modern design - the concentric circles seems to be centred in the image - would you be able to do an experiment to recreate the effect with / without your polariser. I assume it has shiny surfaces and could cause unwanted reflection?

 

[Platographer]

that is a weird effect, my first thought was about unwanted reflections somewhere, possibly outside the lens as it is a modern design - the concentric circles seems to be centred in the image - would you be able to do an experiment to recreate the effect with / without your polariser. I assume it has shiny surfaces and could cause unwanted reflection?

I was not using a CP, only a UV filter or a UV filter with ND filters. The rings show up on shots with and without ND filters. Unfortunately, if I took my UV filter off during the shoot (which I usually keep on to protect the front element), I didn't keep track of which images I took it off for. I may have left it on the whole time. I suppose I could do some experiments with the Tamron 28-200mm with and without the UV filter to see if that is causing it.

It doesn't look like posterization to me - as you say, it has more the look of Newton's rings or some other interference pattern.

Personally, I suspect either one or a combination of filters. Have you tried the same sort of things without any filters at all?

I am going to experiment with that when I get a chance. From what I have read about Newton's rings, the space between the glass has to be really small, so this is not an issue that often arises. I may be misunderstanding it though.

 

[Leswick II]

Your image/es will start to pasteurize when you reduce your jpg (in PP) lower than certain threshold. I try to keep mine appx 1400-1450 pixels on long end and things are acceptable. You might want to test and see what works for you.

As I said in my original post, this is not from jpeg compression because it's just as visible in the raw file in Lightroom. It also should be obvious that it is not posterization because the rings are not due to a color transition.

Posterisation can occur without any change of colour. It can also be an abrupt change in lightness.

But look at the photo. The dark rings radiate from the center throughout the whole photo (not just the sky) in a fairly uniform manner. This clearly is not due to color or luminosity transitions present in the scene. I don't remember ever seeing noticeable posterization before in a 14-bit raw file. It seems extremely obvious to me that posterization can be ruled out

Have you scrutinized the filtering you used ? Problems w/Newton rings normally occur in scanning....and that was not the case.

 

[Tom Axford]

It looks to me like some sort of posterisation effect due to over-processing the image.

What does the original image (straight from the camera, or default processing in Lightroom) look like?

Large areas of uniform blue sky are prone to posterisation if they are heavily processed.

It's definitely not posterization. In some of the photos it is visible in Lightroom before making any adjustments, although bringing the exposure down makes it more obvious. Also, this effect is completely absent from the photos shot with the Sony 16-35mm GM lens, no matter what I do in Lightroom.

Sounds like it is some weird phenomenon produced by that camera+lens combination. I suggest you ask in the appropriate Sony forum to see whether others have experienced anything similar.

 

[smithim]

Personally, I suspect either one or a combination of filters. Have you tried the same sort of things without any filters at all?

I am going to experiment with that when I get a chance. From what I have read about Newton's rings, the space between the glass has to be really small, so this is not an issue that often arises. I may be misunderstanding it though.

No, I agree - that why I hedged my bets with "or some other interference pattern" ;-)

 

[Platographer]

I appreciate everyone's input. I discovered another seemingly inexplicable and possibly related phenomenon on recent photos I took to check for dust spots at f/11 using photos with several seconds exposure I took handheld of a white wall (without trying to keep the camera still). When I bring them into Lightroom and select visualize spots and set the threshold to the max (100), there is a pattern on the photos. Each one is different, but below are two examples that most of the patterns are similar to. Notice how the one has concentric rings (I'm not talking about the dust spots--ignore those). That could be related to the problem that showed up in the photo I posted in my OP. These test shots were not taken with any filters. I cannot think of any reason why the noise would be in an obvious pattern like that or why the pattern would change from one test shot to another. It couldn't be anything on the wall because that would all be blurred to oblivion. Very weird. I would appreciate anyone willing to take similar test shots and see if concentric circles show up when you bring the files into Lightroom, visualize spots, and set threshold to 100. If that is not normal, then maybe that is a clue as to what is wrong.

 

[BGD300V1]

It seems worse in the direction of the sun which would seem to be just out of range top right.

If so, it's possibly the shadow of the filter edge being bounced between the filter and front element of the lens across the frame.

 

[Platographer]

It seems worse in the direction of the sun which would seem to be just out of range top right.

If so, it's possibly the shadow of the filter edge being bounced between the filter and front element of the lens across the frame.

I was not using a lens hood except for when I used the ND filter kit, which has a hood-like mechanism that I had on (you can see it here if you're unfamiliar with the PolarPro Summit kit). The sun was indeed to the right. The shots with my 16-35mm GM lens were taken in similar circumstances, but maybe the CP on that (I had a CP on it most of the time while I had a UV filter on my Tamron 28-200mm) sits just differently enough to avoid the problem? If that is indeed the cause, would you expect a lens hood to solve it? I'm just so frustrated that, every time I shoot, a new problem seems to arise and I feel like a newbie. I'm getting better at photography and got some photos on this shoot that I was proud of, but it's kind of discouraging that some of them were ruined by this mysterious problem. Just when I think I have made every newbie mistake and am aware of every pitfall I need to be aware of, something new pops up. I am planning to go to Yosemite in late June and am wondering what currently unknown problem is going to destroy those photos.:-(

 

[BGD300V1]

It seems worse in the direction of the sun which would seem to be just out of range top right.

If so, it's possibly the shadow of the filter edge being bounced between the filter and front element of the lens across the frame.

I was not using a lens hood except for when I used the ND filter kit, which has a hood-like mechanism that I had on (you can see it here if you're unfamiliar with the PolarPro Summit kit). The sun was indeed to the right. The shots with my 16-35mm GM lens were taken in similar circumstances, but maybe the CP on that (I had a CP on it most of the time while I had a UV filter on my Tamron 28-200mm) sits just differently enough to avoid the problem? If that is indeed the cause, would you expect a lens hood to solve it? I'm just so frustrated that, every time I shoot, a new problem seems to arise and I feel like a newbie. I'm getting better at photography and got some photos on this shoot that I was proud of, but it's kind of discouraging that some of them were ruined by this mysterious problem. Just when I think I have made every newbie mistake and am aware of every pitfall I need to be aware of, something new pops up. I am planning to go to Yosemite in late June and am wondering what currently unknown problem is going to destroy those photos.:-(

You might try something to shade the front of the lens. If you are shooting on a tripod, try just shading it with your hat outside the FOV of the lens. I only use UV filters where there is potential for real damage to the front element from sand, etc. Otherwise, I use a lens hood. If that won't work with filters, I shade with something else, for example, I carry a bit of aluminum foil in my bag to use as a reflector but it also can work as a shade.

 

[Bob]

Looks like you’re using uncoated filter(s). Internal reflections between the filter and the lens can cause those types of rings - otherwise known as Newton’s Rings.

BTW, you should ditch the UV filter. In the best case scenario, it does nothing. In the worst case scenario, it will scratch up your lens when it cracks.

 

[DavidWright2010]

Since you were using a ND filter, I can't tell if your settings are correct for the conditions. Is there any chance that the image is grossly underexposed (4 or more stops) and LR had to boost the brightness? What does the preview look like in camera?

David

 

[bclaff]

If you can supply the raw file then probably we can prove whether this is lens correction (which I think is likely).