How was this lens flare created?

[bbfl]

<p>Hello,<br>

I was wondering how to create such lens flare:<br>

Example 1. <a href="http://keslertran.tumblr.com/image/31441243925">http://keslertran.tumblr.com/image/31441243925</a><br>

Example 2. <a href="http://keslertran.tumblr.com/image/31360570041">http://keslertran.tumblr.com/image/31360570041</a><br>

Example 3. <a href="http://keslertran.tumblr.com/image/29918020590">http://keslertran.tumblr.com/image/29918020590</a><br>

Example 4. <a href="http://keslertran.tumblr.com/image/29912061730">http://keslertran.tumblr.com/image/29912061730</a><br>

...<br>

So the author says it was all natural light, no post-production. <br>

Any ideas where these flares come from or how/what were they created with?<br>

Thanks</p>

[SCL]

<p>Those are pretty horrid, but most are pretty easy to create, especially if you have a few colored foil reflector boards and a helper or two. Number 2 is a little trickier, but could still be accomplished that way, although it looks more like film partially solarized rather than digital .</p>

[gdw]

<p>They are one of two things; 1. Fogged transparency film, 2. Post processed to emulate fogged transparency film.</p>

<p>You see this in holga photography naturally but most holga seems to be bw. It is easy to do in post by using colored textures laid over the original. It is not done with reflectors during the time of the shoot. If it were done during the shoot the colors would follow the contour of the bodys and they don’t. It is either real or emulated fogged film.</p>

[ellis_vener_photography]

It isn't flare, it looks like bad film chemistry, or a light leak in the camera or processing tank. May be it is post production

but if we can trust that it is not digital post-processing. Then either he has a camera with a bad light leak or did it

deliberately . But it isn't flare.

[igord]

<p>My friend gets very similar results during scanning the negatives.</p>

 

[allenahale]

<p>Are you asking so that you can duplicate it? Are you asking so as to avoid it? I hope it is so that it can be avoided.</p>

[bbfl]

<p>I am asking becasue I want to try to achieve a similar effect. Hmm I don't think they are horrid actually I think they are really nice and the author made it intentionally. I forgot to say that the author alos says it was shot with film not digital.<br>

Thanks. I think that meaybe that's most likely a "bad" scanning or as <a href="../photodb/user?user_id=411344">Gary Woodard</a> suggests. </p>

[michaelmowery]

<p>You can try to do some type of photoshop work to your images but in your examples they look like true light leaks on real negative or positive film caused either during the changing of the film or during processing. All which could have been done intentionally or not, resulting in something that is pleasing or not depending upon the viewer.</p>

[thierry nguyen cuu - nomad]

<p>I'd say it's digital and done in post.<br>

I did some thing similar recently:<br>

<a href="https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150945492122027&set=a.379986552026.164881.193637572026&type=1&theater">https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150945492122027&set=a.379986552026.164881.193637572026&type=1&theater</a></p>

 

[igord]

<p>From Medium Format Forum:<br>

"</p>

 

<p ><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=2403817">Rodeo Joe</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Frequent poster" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/3rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, Apr 01, 2012; 07:10 a.m.</p>

 

<p>If you still want the effect of light leaks and internal camera flare, then just place a couple of bits of paper along the sides of the mirror-box of your RB. Otherwise "fake it up" in PS. There's nothing wrong with afterwork; it's almost as old as photography itself. Look at the work of O. G. Rejlander for example. And how do you think those early landscapists got their well-defined cloudy skies with only blue-sensitive materials? Answer: pencil work!<br>

BTW, an MF lens with a definite "look" to it is the Schneider Radionar 80mm f/2.8 - as found on Franka Solida 6x6 folders and others. In fact an old folder would be a good place to start if you want to puncture the bellows for light leaks and scrape the black paint off the inside to get flare and partial reflections.</p>

 

 

 

 

<p ><a name="00aDuE"></a><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=6899316">Nathan Bonsal</a> , Apr 03, 2012; 09:14 a.m.</p>

 

<p>Inside the mirror box of the RB, you can add some pieces of scotch tape, or even paper held down with same. Don't destroy the blacking, defeat it. Another thing you can do is to modify a film back with a paper cutout of whatever reflectance you want so that behind the film, there's a white surface- but not everywhere. You can even add a little foil tape to the lens mount from the back (inside the camera). You can add a piece of cellophane over the lens with a round hole cut in it. There are a million creative things you can do to create artifacts or intentional defects. To get some idea, just remember what a perfect camera has to have- you can <strong>defeat</strong> any combination of them and end up with interesting results:<br />Light tight box<br />nonreflective interior (dull blackness)<br />unobstructed light path<br />well ground lenses that are clean and color-corrected<br />lens axis perpendicular to film plane and centered<br />black behind the film so that light only gets one shot at absorbtion<br />film is held flat<br />aperture is round<br />aperture is centered with respect to lens axis<br /><strong>the entire exposure is made with the same aperture- ie the aperture blades are held immobile during exposure</strong><br />one exposure per frame of film followed by isolation from additional illumination<br />process chemistry is proper for film type and agitation is consistent with all areas of film receiving the same process<br />film is not scratched or damaged and the film has not passed its expiration date"</p>

 

 

[pulpmojo]

<p>yes, this is definitely not lens flare, more than likely caused by light leaking into the camera.</p>