Adventures in lens flare

[Nekrose]

I'm working on learning how to shoot into the sun. I'm not quite sure how to get good lens flare, so I apologize in advance.

It has been a while since i have been on DPS. I'm in serious need of critiquing and general butt kicking.

Exif:
Canon 7D, 70-200mm f/2.8L at 70mm
f/3.5
ss: 1/320
ISO: 200

[ajax_andy]

I think this picture isn't quite "there" in terms of what you were hoping to achieve I think tbh.

This to me just looks like a very blown out sky, rather than there being any positive effect from the sun.

What time of day were you shooting at?

I'm not saying the following pic is in anyway an amazing photo, but this was my 1st attempt of using the sun in an image:



I think the sun has an impact on this pic as the beams are clearly visible, where as on your shot they aren't. I shot this during the "golden" hour so the sun was less harsh and lower in the sky.

I'm no expert though as this is the only time i've ever tried to do it.

I really like the rest of the photo btw, lovely moment captured well

[roostabunny]

Great shot! Congrats on capturing a fun and intimate moment.

"Good" lens flare is completely subjective. I mean, it's officially considered a flaw, to the point where we buy lens hoods in order to prevent it.

I think you have classic lens flare here, used well. You have some nice circles up by the groom's head and an overall glow. It's those circles and glow (as much as any rays, which I also see) that define lens flare.

I think flare gives a casual, spontaneous look to an image. It says, "I was having too much fun to think about about where my camera was pointing." And your subjects fit that mood perfectly.

I could talk technical, but I'd just be regurgitating what I learned from this guy.

Part of the trick is that it can suck contrast out of your image (the "glow"). I think you've done good with the exposure on this (maybe a smidge overexposed). If it was mine, I might see if I could bump up the shadows a bit without ruining the nice, glowey "summer love" effect you have now.

And personal opinion here, I don't think Ajax Andy's shot is the right example for you. I think it wants to be a rim-lit portrait (like this one - low angle, badass - just swap the gun for a guitar), but the sun and flare compete with the subject to be the focal point of the image.

[ajax_andy]

Originally Posted by roostabunny

Great shot! Congrats on capturing a fun and intimate moment.

"Good" lens flare is completely subjective. I mean, it's officially considered a flaw, to the point where we buy lens hoods in order to prevent it.

I think you have classic lens flare here, used well. You have some nice circles up by the groom's head and an overall glow. It's those circles and glow (as much as any rays, which I also see) that define lens flare.

I think flare gives a casual, spontaneous look to an image. It says, "I was having too much fun to think about about where my camera was pointing." And your subjects fit that mood perfectly.

I could talk technical, but I'd just be regurgitating what I learned from this guy.

Part of the trick is that it can suck contrast out of your image (the "glow"). I think you've done good with the exposure on this (maybe a smidge overexposed). If it was mine, I might see if I could bump up the shadows a bit without ruining the nice, glowey "summer love" effect you have now.

And personal opinion here, I don't think Ajax Andy's shot is the right example for you. I think it wants to be a rim-lit portrait (like this one - low angle, badass - just swap the gun for a guitar), but the sun and flare compete with the subject to be the focal point of the image.

It depends really... I wasn't going for a soft rim light as the whole concept of the shoot was to not have a nice soft airy fairy portrait shoot as I have too many of them already lol. So maybe yeah my example wasn't perfect, but I was trying to show that the effect the sun has can be quite dramatic if you are willing to push it a bit further. I think the OP's shot doesn't quite work and I was trying to show them that it can be better to be more brave, or shoot at the right time of day to get a nicer effect.

I'm happy to scratch off my photo as an example though as you are probably right that it isn't exactly the same style as shot as this one... instead i'll post a link to another thread that was on here a week or two back.

My first Portrait Session. Open for Critcism :)

I think this is an excellent example of a soft rim light, and maybe this would be more what should be aimed for in my opinion with this type of shot.

[Niresangwa]

I think as a tentative attempt at including it, it's perfectly fine, though for my tastes a little weak... if you hadn;t posed the question I don't know that would have known you were trying to employ it as a feature.

I try to include flare as a matter of course, not just the sun, but also using my rim and fill lights for this effect. The thing that is often missed, and took me a little to remember, is that you can see the flare in the viewfinder, and therefore can attenuate it while shooting..

...yes, it sounds like something obvious, but it's a conscious thing you have to remember, placing the circles and blown spots. I find that telling the client It's going to take me 10 seconds or so and a haf dozen shots to get what I want, so just keep kissing each other or looking at each other, and they never have a problem with it.

I then, after having locked the focus, work with changing the angle and positioning of the flare effects and shoot a variety of them... as long as you're not placing the really intense, small circles over eyes or major features, it's all good.

Ultimately I ended up playing with the three or four stable lenses I have with inanimate objects to get a feel for how they handle it... I'd definitely suggest doing so. While it's true it will diminish the contrast sooc, it's nothing that can't be fixed in post. In some cases, you don't get the low contrast feel that goes with it, and have to add it in there.

Think of how flare is represented in movies and tv shows.. it's rarely subtle... people are quite used to seeing it, and anyone who considers it a technical flaw in this day and age is missing out.

[roostabunny]

Originally Posted by Niresangwa

Think of how flare is represented in movies and tv shows.. it's rarely subtle... people are quite used to seeing it, and anyone who considers it a technical flaw in this day and age is missing out.

Have you seen the latest Star Trek movie? J.J. Abram's cinematographer went to great lengths to create all that indoor lens flare (because all their equipment is designed to eliminate it), and the effect is amazing!

Maybe "traditional flaw" would be a better description than "technical flaw". Either way, I agree, nowadays it's only a flaw if it's not on purpose. And even then, only if you don't like it.

[roostabunny]

Originally Posted by ajax_andy

It depends really... I wasn't going for a soft rim light as the whole concept of the shoot was to not have a nice soft airy fairy portrait shoot as I have too many of them already lol. So maybe yeah my example wasn't perfect, but I was trying to show that the effect the sun has can be quite dramatic if you are willing to push it a bit further. I think the OP's shot doesn't quite work and I was trying to show them that it can be better to be more brave, or shoot at the right time of day to get a nicer effect.

I'm happy to scratch off my photo as an example though as you are probably right that it isn't exactly the same style as shot as this one... instead i'll post a link to another thread that was on here a week or two back.

My first Portrait Session. Open for Critcism :)

I think this is an excellent example of a soft rim light, and maybe this would be more what should be aimed for in my opinion with this type of shot.

Actually, I was imagining your shot using the sun as a rim light. You've got the badass, the guitar, the low angle, and I think a rim light is great for that style of shot. Truth is, I apologize, I probably shouldn't get in to critiquing your shot in this thread.

And that said, I guess I can also see more your original point, and I agree with both you and Niresangwa, the flare is present but very subtle and could be more dramatic to good effect.

[Niresangwa]

Originally Posted by roostabunny

Have you seen the latest Star Trek movie? J.J. Abram's cinematographer went to great lengths to create all that indoor lens flare (because all their equipment is designed to eliminate it), and the effect is amazing!

Yep, they used it very well, and that genre really excels at employing it. Its a few years old now, but the cinematography in Minority Report is great for this too... the blown highlights and intentional overexposure really played well.

[Carsten]

Here is me shooting into the "sun"( wasn't really the sun, it was an SB-25)

Not the best example but something.

As for getting flare, there is a couple things to take into consideration, one being that lens flare is considered a Flaw and you are shooting with a canon 70-200mm 2.8(big, expensive lens that canon has taken extra time and consideration to prevent lens flare) and your shooting directly into the sun, which to my experience doesn't give the best flare.


My advice is to ditch the 70-200mm and pick up something a little lesser optical quality, and don't shoot directly into the sun, instead shoot at an angle to the sun so that the light rays have a chance to skim across the front of the lens and make a nice flare.

[roostabunny]

Originally Posted by Niresangwa

Yep, they used it very well, and that genre really excels at employing it. Its a few years old now, but the cinematography in Minority Report is great for this too... the blown highlights and intentional overexposure really played well.

I've been wanting to watch Minority Report again. I gotta re-up with Netflix...