PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Is flare bad?
*IF* you have some authority which asserts this to be true and
describes the mechanism by which this raised level of light scatter
is reduced by coatings, well then, I and others would like to see it.
The Hasselblad Manual is one of the best book on photography
Hi Andre:
It is interesting what you say about the K35 f3.5 lens. I have actually
acquired one recently in a like new condition. I used it last weekend and
tested it for ghosting pointing the upper frame corner at the rather
brilliant sun (the snow and ice desert of the completely frozen
Andre:
I would be interested in your findings so please post them.
Best, - Andrew.
-Original Message-
From: Andre Langevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: March 18, 2003 1:51 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Is flare bad?
Hi Andre:
It is interesting what you say about the K35
Accept my appologies too. I've been a bit testy lately.
- Original Message -
From: Andre Langevin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 9:07 AM
Subject: Re: Is flare bad?
Bob, I'm sorry. I was not trying to win a battle. I thought it
would have been
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
or some bright light that is part of the subject. And this is, I
think, why the word ghost has been chosen to depict the effect.
Lens flare as it is
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
Effects often called flair are caused by:
Reflections. - Produces defined ghosts.
Bubbles in the glass. - Raises level of general light scatter reducing
contrast.
Other imperfections in the glass. - Raises level of general light
scatter reducing contrast.
Particles in the glass. -
Ghosting is a form of flair.In fact, ghosting is the only form of flair that
can be mitigated by quality lens coatings.
Regards,
Bob
True that some ghosts still have a lot of flair but, joke apart, are
you sure lens coatings only improved ghosting? I think it
contributes to lower flare
On 11 Mar 2003 at 15:56, Andre Langevin wrote:
True that some ghosts still have a lot of flair but, joke apart, are
you sure lens coatings only improved ghosting? I think it
contributes to lower flare level of a lens even if lens
construction is mostly involved. Or have I been mislead by
- Original Message -
From: Francis Alviar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax Discuss List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 2:15 PM
Subject: Is flare bad?
Hello to all,
Just a general question. Is lens-flare considered
generally bad for the photo?
Two samples for your consideration
When you see the outline of the aperture opening, like you do in the two
pictures you refer to, that isn't flare, it's ghosting. It isn't bad if
it works as a compositional element.
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello to all,
Just a general question. Is lens-flare considered
generally bad for
Yes, save for rare artistic constructions.
Regards,
Bob
Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without an
accordion.
-- Jed Babbit (Former US Under-secretary of Defense)
From: Francis Alviar [EMAIL
If you saw it through the viewfinder, but it wasn't on the film, the
lens coating had nothing to do with it. In both cases the light passed
through the lens with the coating. The difference is that when you
looked through the viewfinder the lens was wide open, but stopped down
when the film
Francis,
The flare in the photo with the bench is great. It
adds to the shot. The flare in the house photo on the
other hand just looks bad.
I try to use flare when I can and when it looks
appropriate. It's tough to make it work all the time.
As the sun is just coming up or going down is
Flare isn't always bad. Sometimes it contributes a sense of sunshine and
well being. In your first example, I think the flare is a plus. In your
second example, it's more of a distraction. I'm surprised you
encountered flare in this image. There doesn't seem to be an obvious
source. If you had
15 matches
Mail list logo
