Intentionally induce iris flares?

[James]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Hi. I'm wondering what causes the cascading iris diaphragham flare,
and I don't know if I'm describing it correctly. I know it's overused,
but I think it can add a nice "this was taken with a camera" touch to
certain shots. If you wanted this effect, how would you make it happen?
If you wanted to avoid this effect, how would you suppress it?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

fishbowl@conservatory.com (james) writes:

> Hi. I'm wondering what causes the cascading iris diaphragham flare,
> and I don't know if I'm describing it correctly. I know it's overused,
> but I think it can add a nice "this was taken with a camera" touch to
> certain shots. If you wanted this effect, how would you make it
> happen?

Include the sun in the picture, select a small aperture (high f/
number).

> If you wanted to avoid this effect, how would you suppress it?

Lens hood, don't shoot into the sun, keep the sun out of the frame,
select maximum aperture (smallest f/ numbers)....

--
Todd H.
http/www.toddh.net/

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

james wrote:

> Hi. I'm wondering what causes the cascading iris diaphragham flare,
> and I don't know if I'm describing it correctly. I know it's overused,
> but I think it can add a nice "this was taken with a camera" touch to
> certain shots. If you wanted this effect, how would you make it happen?
> If you wanted to avoid this effect, how would you suppress it?

Like so: http/www.pbase.com/shootin/image/37709986 ?

The cascades are from in lens reflections.
The star points on the sun are from aperture blades.
The "motes" all over the place are likely from dust.

--Use a small aperture (f/11 and smaller to get the 'points' on the
light source.)

--make sure direct light falls on the lens for the flare. This works
whether the light source is in the image or not.

Fusion lamp sources are best. There is one about 150 x 10^6 km from
here, often usable for 10 - 15 hours per day. And although it outputs
some 4 x 10^26 W, you'll never get a bill for it.

--Add filters to add layers of sun images.

Avoid: esp. keep direct light off of the lens.

Cheers,
Alan.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http/www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http/www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http/www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

 

[James]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Good info, thanks. I'm in Arizona, shooting cactus and landscapes. (If
that sounds mundane, consider that the Sonoran desert is in bloom right
now, and it is quite lovely). Plenty of bright sun opportunites. I'll
keep you posted, and hopefully show some results of my next excursion.

 

[James]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <d4k2ks$gm0$1@inews.gazeta.pl>,
Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

>Fusion lamp sources are best. There is one about 150 x 10^6 km from
>here, often usable for 10 - 15 hours per day. And although it outputs
>some 4 x 10^26 W, you'll never get a bill for it.

Thanks Alan. I've got plenty of sun to work with. Doing landscapes in
and around Tucson.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 23:43:31 GMT, fishbowl@conservatory.com (james)
wrote:

>Hi. I'm wondering what causes the cascading iris diaphragham flare,
>and I don't know if I'm describing it correctly. I know it's overused,
>but I think it can add a nice "this was taken with a camera" touch to
>certain shots. If you wanted this effect, how would you make it happen?
>If you wanted to avoid this effect, how would you suppress it?

You can use photoshop to create it. It includes a series of lense
flares in a filter. My gut impression is to do it post process. You
could probably create your own series of lens flares with different
shapes - maybe using an alpha channel; and use a gradient to colorize
them/in conjunction with layer blend properties and opacity.

rgds
Ken

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

james <fishbowl@conservatory.com> wrote:

> Hi. I'm wondering what causes the cascading iris diaphragham flare,
> and I don't know if I'm describing it correctly. I know it's overused,
> but I think it can add a nice "this was taken with a camera" touch to
> certain shots. If you wanted this effect, how would you make it happen?

Use a zoom lens at a small aperture, and allow the light from the sun to
fall directly on the glass of the lens. If you like the "hexagon" shape
or whatever, choose a lens with a lower number of aperture blades that
are not rounded (the exact opposite of what you look for to get the best
out-of-focus-area rendition).

> If you wanted to avoid this effect, how would you suppress it?

Don't let the light fall on the lens, primarily by using a lens hood, but
if that's not enough, by putting something like your hand out to shade the
lens from the light. If the sun is in the picture or otherwise can't be
prevented from shining directly on the glass, use a fixed-length lens (with
fewer elements to cause reflections) and wider aperture to minimize the
effect.

--
Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 01:46:00 -0000, Jeremy Nixon <jeremy@exit109.com>
wrote:

>james <fishbowl@conservatory.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi. I'm wondering what causes the cascading iris diaphragham flare,
>> and I don't know if I'm describing it correctly. I know it's overused,
>> but I think it can add a nice "this was taken with a camera" touch to
>> certain shots. If you wanted this effect, how would you make it happen?
>
>Use a zoom lens at a small aperture, and allow the light from the sun to
>fall directly on the glass of the lens. If you like the "hexagon" shape
>or whatever, choose a lens with a lower number of aperture blades that
>are not rounded (the exact opposite of what you look for to get the best
>out-of-focus-area rendition).
>
>> If you wanted to avoid this effect, how would you suppress it?
>
>Don't let the light fall on the lens, primarily by using a lens hood, but
>if that's not enough, by putting something like your hand out to shade the
>lens from the light. If the sun is in the picture or otherwise can't be
>prevented from shining directly on the glass, use a fixed-length lens (with
>fewer elements to cause reflections) and wider aperture to minimize the
>effect.

Hmmm..i've found i get the most flare when using a circular polarizer
in a wide angle (average aper) and shooting toward the sun. Sooooo...
i guess if i wanted to get flare...then i'd position the sun just out
of frame, or partially masked by a tree or something, or crop.

I'll need to try it zoomed/small aper and see how much i get that way.

rgds
Ken