is this a result of a polarized filter?

[tara_p]

<p>see how amazing the sun looks in these? i've never used a polarized filter (feel pretty uneducated about that that really even... is) -- but is the star-like quality of the backlight here a result of a polarized filter used well? or... a different kind of filter? thanks in advance for your insight!<br>

<img src="http://www.amelialyon.net/assets_c/2012/03/dj_eng_blog014-thumb-678x452-14082.jpg" alt="" width="678" height="452" /><br>

<img src="http://www.amelialyon.net/assets_c/2012/03/dj_eng_blog003-thumb-678x452-14060.jpg" alt="" width="678" height="452" /></p>

 

[ariel_s1]

<p>No, it isn't because of a polarized filter. In fact, since you're shooting directly into light, you're better off not using any filters on your lens whatsoever. Do a google search for creating sunstars in photography, and you'll find more information than you'd ever want to know. The main thing is to use a small aperture. Every lens will produce sunstars differently, depending on the design of the lens and the shape of the aperture blades. Practice and enjoy!</p>

[tara_p]

<p>thank you so much, really. i had no idea -- so helpful!</p>

[jose_angel]

<p>Well, my father used to like this effect... ; he used a B+W star filter. It rotates to place the star at the desired position. I think there are different ones, with more or less number of crossed lines.</p>

[joe_cormier]

<p>Try F-22.</p>

[jim_momary]

<p>Sunstar secret number 42:</p>

<p>The number of rays on the star depends on the number of aperture baldes.<br>

Even numbers of blades produce one ray per blade.<br>

Odd numbers of blades produce two rays per blade.<br>

E.G. - <br>

6 aperture blades = 6 pointed sunstar<br>

7 aperture blades = 14 pointed sunstar</p>

<p>Seems to always be the case in my limited observations.<br>

The smaller the aperture (toward F22) the more prominent the sunstars will be. Also works with point sources of light at night. Of course the star can be created with star filters at any aperture, and then can be rotated easily for positioning.</p>

<p>Jim M.</p>

 

[Peter_in_PA]

<blockquote>

<p>Of course the star can be created with star filters at any aperture, and then can be rotated easily for positioning.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>but it's not... quite... the same.</p>

[CvhKaar]

<p>mm To me it looks like the combination of a cokin star filter ( 8point and 16 point) possibly combiuned with a blue filter. A direct copy of the effect shown in the cokin book "Filter system for photo and video" by mr Heiner Henninges ..</p>

<p> Neither of those pics looks like a "normal" sunstar caused by the aperture i think On the second one the aperture shape is shown by the 6 sided reflections while the sunstar is 8 pointed.. <br>

There are also some halo parts on the right side which indicate a side effect of cokin like star filter to me, these are not caused by the aperture shape..<br>

Still got a more or less "complete set" of Cokin stuff somewhere, maybe i should give them a go again, and see how the act on digital</p>

[jared_youtsey]

<p>If you don't know what a polarizing filter does then you really should do some research on it. My polarizer is almost always on my camera when doing anything with sky or water in it. I love it. Something everyone should have in their bag. Except maybe a pure portrait photographer.</p>

[raczoliver]

<p>It is caused by the aperture blades of the lens, you don't need a filter for this effect. Note however, that some lenses have rounded aperture blades for a smoother background blur. These lenses won't produce such stars.</p>

[john_h.1]

<p>Did you ask the person whose name is watermarked on the photo you copied and posted?</p>

<p>http://www.amelialyon.net/</p>

<p> </p>