Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by the Rosswog, Mar 26, 2007.
I canT' stand the flare around every light
the rest is nice
Do you own a DSLR?
That shot is perfect man.
any way to get rid of it?
I like how the flares look...like stars on a pole
Got some good shots last night though, just had to watch those on coming cars while shooting in the middle of the street!
I think it adds to the photo as well.
I have a DSLR, and I still don't like flare.
So what do you do about it then?
Don't listen to him he's canadian
I didn't want to start a fight about lens flare.
there's not ton to do about it aside from post processing.
1- remove any filter in front of the lens
2- change angle (often impossible when you want the same composition)
3- get better lens (different lenses gives more or less flare)
easiest is post processing, especially on a dark background, it should be easy to remove. But it seems a lot are liking the effect.
1.there was no filter...
2. it flared no matter what angle...
3 they all were high end lenses..
You could post process them out, sure, but that would take too damn long and the lights would look very awkward without the starring around them.
I never use my filter at night. Not for the starring, but because you get reflections in spots that have no good reason being there.
Angle? Meh, I don't see how that would help. In the case, he's between two bridges. Where would you rather see him take it from?
As for lenses, not so sure. I'm using the shitty 18-55 kit lens.
So Im a noob, what settings did you use to get that type of shot? Long exposure Im guessing, what else?
What focal length & what aperture did you shoot at?
Shooting close to wide open can reduce the light coronas significantly
17mm / F11 / ~15 second exposure
long exposure, small aperture (higher F number)
Just from playing around with night shots, it seems when the speed and aperature are matched they come out nicely (10 sec, F10 or 13 sec, F13). Is that just a coincidence or is there some truth in having the two matched for good pics?
What did you do differently?
ot: Why do they have 3 bridges so close together? isnt it abit redundant and expensive?
At 17mm you shouldnt need F11. That is why you are getting the ugly flare.
What would have been a better aperture? I used F11 because it's widely known as the "sweet spot" for landscapes with the 17-40 F4 L.
Pittsburgh's know as the city of bridges... Allegheny County has the highest concentration of bridges in the world. I have thought to myself - one of the root causes of Pittsburgh's financial troubles must be that the cost of maintain not only all of those bridges, but tunnels as well. Our city has a truly complex rat's nest of streets / highways / bridges / tunnels / hills / mountains all over the place. And downtown is shaped like a triangle, so the city blocks aren't square either. But the cool thing is that they built 3 identical bridges connecting downtown to the North Side at the 6th 7th and 9th streets. 6th street bridge is dedicated to the memory of Roberto Clemente.
I like the flares
That's not lens flare.
It's caused from high fstops and long exposures. The higher the fstop, the more pronounced the star will be. There is nothing you can do about it to prevent it, other than shooting a low Fstop, then you'll have just a big white ball, rather than a star.
Next time you are out around these lights at night, squint your eyes and you'll get a similar effect.
f/11 is great for daytime landscapes.... from my experience I've found f/5.6 to be best at night.