| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/01/2003 10:19:28 PM · #1 |
| You know when the sun is off to the side of you and you get a line of little circles of refracted light (i think thats what they are called), is a photo with this included considered botched and should be trashed or is ok?? |
|
|
|
11/01/2003 10:31:58 PM · #2 |
Acceptable to whom, and under what conditions?
For example, I'm sure if you can produce a recent picture of Mr. Hussein, the CIA will be willing to overlook a couple of inobtrusive sun flares or refractions. If you're submitting a floral arrangement to Sunset magazine, I'd suggest re-shooting with better lighting conditions.
If it's an otherwise worthwhile photo, I myself don't worry too much about technical imperfections. I'm sure it would be more important to a lot of folks, though. And, as always, I think you should worry about whether or not YOU like the photo as it is, and don't be too concerned with the opinions of the rest of us. |
|
|
|
11/01/2003 10:32:55 PM · #3 |
Sometimes the "lens flare" helps add interest to the shot. Do you have an example.
|
|
|
|
11/01/2003 10:34:18 PM · #4 |
| My definitive answer is.......it depends. Is there a reason for it being in the shot? Does it add to the overall photograph? I recently purposely added lens flare in photoshop in one of my images because i thought it added to the overall shot: Redemption (it is very faint). I can see where it would add to certain shots like landscapes. |
|
|
|
11/01/2003 10:36:55 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by ellamay:
You know when the sun is off to the side of you and you get a line of little circles of refracted light (i think thats what they are called), is a photo with this included considered botched and should be trashed or is ok?? |
I specifically hunt down entries with discernible refractions in them and, catagorically, award them 1's, even if the challenge calls for them. After all, this is a free country, and we can do what we want. |
|
|
|
11/01/2003 10:53:08 PM · #6 |
thx everyone for yout input and example, I agree with your shot jgal, it did add to it.
Good to hear it is not a definite 'NO', (unless you are zeuszen). |
|
|
|
11/01/2003 11:25:36 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by ellamay:
thx everyone for yout input and example, I agree with your shot jgal, it did add to it.
Good to hear it is not a definite 'NO', (unless you are zeuszen). |
Or unless I choose less liberty. ;-) [end of jest]
Message edited by author 2003-11-01 23:26:51. |
|
|
|
11/01/2003 11:40:40 PM · #8 |
I chose to leave the lens flare in THIS PHOTO because I thought it added interest.
|
|
|
|
11/01/2003 11:50:02 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
I chose to leave the lens flare in THIS PHOTO because I thought it added interest. |
Very cool looks like it was taken from Mars.
|
|
|
|
11/02/2003 04:03:53 AM · #10 |
| it all depends on the photo. sometimes, a lens flare adds a little more to the composition of the photo. in general though, it's usually unwanted and that's what a lens hood is for, to prevent lens flares. but it really depends on how the photo looks. with art, there's no strict rules. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/29/2025 08:18:53 AM EDT.
