From: "Andre Langevin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I don't agree Bob, because a ghost refers to an image of an existing > and (relatively) identificable object, like the form of the aperture
Generally no. The form of the aperture is seen as an out of focus point light source. It is not flair, reflection or ghost. It is simply an out of focus light source. > or some bright light that is part of the subject. Yes, and this is what I've been saying or intimating. A reflection is just that, a reflection - just like looking in a mirror. In the camera, the reflection may be out of focus. And there are examples in the photo I gave you the URL for. As to identifiable, well, depending on where the reflection occurs, it may be somewhat identifiable or not, depending on how it's focused on the film. > And this is, I > think, why the word "ghost" has been chosen to depict the effect. Yes. No one has said this isn't so. > Lens flare as it is described in its generic form is what the Ilford > Manual (arguably the bible on photographic matters) qualify as > "non-image-forming" light which is spread uniformly over the the > surface of the film. When the re-reflected light forms a more or > less out of focus image of bright objects in the subjects, they call > it ghost image. Yes. > You tell me that flare is a type of ghost. I would say that ghost is > a type of flare... Now you're really pissing me off because I've never said that flair is a type of ghost. In fact, in my first post on the subject I listed ghosts as only one of many types of flair! Therefore in my first post, I said that a ghost is a type of flair! In your zeal to be so god damned bright, you've entirely misrepresented what I said in order to attempt to win some stupid little argument, probably to boost your ego. Fine. Have it your way. Put whatever words you want into my posts and claim they are mine, then argue against them so everyone will know that you are such a smart fellow. I have no interest in dealing further with the likes of you. The whole discussion was about coatings and how they reduce flair. Since coatings affect *only* the efficiency of light is transmission and since this is accomplished by matching the impedance of air to the impedance of glass (multi-coatings over a broader spectrum) so that less light is lost due to *reflection*, the discussion centers on *reflection*. Ghosts are caused by *reflection*.
