Lens Flare?

[fstopper89]

Here’s a touchy subject, maybe. I tend to find lens flare that occurs naturally to be appealing in most cases, somewhat artsy even. Kind of breaking the rules in a pretty way. Sometimes I’ll get images with lensflare evident in them and I consider it to be a plus if it looks natural in the photo (sunny tones etc.) I know lens flares are desireable in a lot of photographers’ opinions, and there are even photoshop actions to put in fake lens flares (most of the time, it looks unnatural… I’ve tried them before and occasionally they seem fitting.)

The recent wedding I shot I got this image that I really liked, and it had a rainbow-ish lens flare. The bride’s brother, who is my friend, said he hated the lens flare and challenged me to edit it out, which I did. I posted both images on my Flickr page and would really like opinions. I like both, but they have a different quality to them.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/roxanne_elise_photography/8191546117/in/photostream

And maybe the flare doesn’t “work” with this image anyway, and it was smarter to remove it.

Here’ are a couple nature shots in which I really like the lens flare:

[Click It And Stick It]

In the third image it isn’t bad, but personally I don’t think lens flare has any place in portraits.  Just my opinion.

[soaringturkeys]

The first lens flare takes away from the photo. It doesn’t add to it and, if anything, it just shows that you made a mistake. I personally think it’s fine to have lens flare in things. As long as adds to the photo like your other two photos.

One of my photography pet peeves however is people saying “o I kinda like it in an artsy way.” when they make an error and say that it just makes the photo all the more beautiful. It’s a mistake, no point covering up a mistake by saying that you discovered some hidden beauty.

Flickr and things like Facebook is not really the greatest place to get opinions. All you really get are a whole bunch of sycophants affirming everything you do as gold. If you really want honest and true opinions, go to modelmayhem.com or any photographer dedicated websites and they will come up with the same conclusion. The lens flare was a mistake.

[cameraclicker]

I agree with soaringturkeys.

I will add:  Canon’s L lenses and (I believe) all the Sigma lenses come with lens hoods for a reason, they cut down on lens flare and improve contrast.  They also offer a degree of mechanical protection for the lens.  You can put them on facing out for use and backwards to cover part of the lens for storage.

[stef]

Flare has a place, and I’ve intentionally shot portraits with it, but that’s rare. You also need the right lens for it, because the flare qualities change on lens and settings, and the direction of the light.

 

Most of the time, flare is a mistake or a cheap lens. It harms your contrast, making your lens perform much worse. Intentionally using it for art purposes is fine, but it’s like smearing vaseline on the front element. Think of it like that the next time you shoot into the sun.

[Mrs Woo]

I definitely don’t like the lens flare on the last image.  It makes it too hard for me to decide of those berries might be tasty.

I almost always have my lens hoods on my lenses.  Too easy to knock them into things so there is some added protection (I also have learned that, even with good quality UV filters you can end up with not quite as good of quality as your lens produces “naked,” especially when I was doing night photography, and also that it wasn’t actually necessary as some websites insinuate), so the lens hood is a good way to protect a lens while not having to worry about issues with the filter causing ghosting or other abberations.  I don’t get a lot of flare, though rarely I might try to catch enough of the sun to create flare on purpose for some shots.  My Arabian looks nice with some lens flare if it is in the right place, for instance.

[cameraclicker]

This is one of the few photos I have that I think flare contributes to in a positive way.

Seagull with lens flare 

Usually I do my best to avoid it.

Browneyedgirl89, how did you get the image to display in the post? Mine show in the editor and disappear when I submit.

[fstopper89]

I do like it in the seagull shot.

To be honest I’m not sure… sometimes when I just post a hyperlink it shows up, and sometimes it doesn’t. I’m convinced the site is a little buggy. In one post I even tried the brackets and it just broke the link.

[cameraclicker]

Thank you.

When I have some time I will experiment with trying to get an image to display.  It would be nice to get consistent results.  If I find the way I will post a note.

[Author]

Posts