What is this?

esc2476esc2476 Registered Users Posts: 354 Major grins
edited October 21, 2010 in Weddings
I recently attended a wedding and took photos as a guest-I never use flash because I do not want to interfere with the photographer. Anyway, many of my photos have these green dots like this one? What is it?

1055724147_bCuMH-L.jpg
-Eric

My Gear
My Websites - Personal www.ericsmemories.com |"Professional" www.vividphotography.org
My Favorite Photos - Chicago, NYC, DC, London, Prague, Alaska, Yellowstone, Glacier NP, Vermont, Mt. Rushmore, Badlands NP, The Appalachian Trail

Comments

  • esc2476esc2476 Registered Users Posts: 354 Major grins
    edited October 19, 2010
    I should add, I do not view this photo as a "keeper", but it was the best illustration of the green dots.
    -Eric

    My Gear
    My Websites - Personal     www.ericsmemories.com |"Professional" www.vividphotography.org
    My Favorite Photos - Chicago, NYC, DC, London, Prague, Alaska, Yellowstone, Glacier NP, Vermont, Mt. Rushmore, Badlands NP, The Appalachian Trail
  • innershellinnershell Registered Users Posts: 26 Big grins
    edited October 19, 2010
    Paranormal activity? It's a little odd that many photos have the green dots, otherwise I would have concluded that it was glare from pod lighting. Did that venue have pod lighting like this throughout the venue?
  • esc2476esc2476 Registered Users Posts: 354 Major grins
    edited October 19, 2010
    innershell wrote: »
    Paranormal activity? It's a little odd that many photos have the green dots, otherwise I would have concluded that it was glare from pod lighting. Did that venue have pod lighting like this throughout the venue?
    What is pod lighting? The photographer set up a few remote flashes on high light stands.
    -Eric

    My Gear
    My Websites - Personal     www.ericsmemories.com |"Professional" www.vividphotography.org
    My Favorite Photos - Chicago, NYC, DC, London, Prague, Alaska, Yellowstone, Glacier NP, Vermont, Mt. Rushmore, Badlands NP, The Appalachian Trail
  • esc2476esc2476 Registered Users Posts: 354 Major grins
    edited October 19, 2010
    I guess I am hoping this is the result of the wedding photographer, because I would hate for him have to deal with this on many of his photos.
    -Eric

    My Gear
    My Websites - Personal     www.ericsmemories.com |"Professional" www.vividphotography.org
    My Favorite Photos - Chicago, NYC, DC, London, Prague, Alaska, Yellowstone, Glacier NP, Vermont, Mt. Rushmore, Badlands NP, The Appalachian Trail
  • l.k.madisonl.k.madison Registered Users Posts: 542 Major grins
    edited October 20, 2010
    esc2476 wrote: »
    I guess I am hoping this is the result of the wedding photographer, because I would hate for him have to deal with this on many of his photos.

    Looks like glare to me. I know it sounds weird, but I've had it happen before. Especially given that they are in a pattern, I'd assume it's from the lights on the ceiling.

    A friend of mine got married in early January of 2010 and shooting pictures of her wedding as a guest, I had a problem with a pole outside still wrapped in blue Christmas lights. It forced me to convert ALL of her "leaving the venue" pictures to b/w, even the ones when I wasn't actively shooting the pole, it just happened to be close.

    I really hope the pro's shots don't have those in them, that's a LOT of editing to get those to go away.
    personal facebook
    photography facebook
    twitter
  • BlurmoreBlurmore Registered Users Posts: 992 Major grins
    edited October 20, 2010
    I can tell you exactly what it is...see the three candelabra light on the wall? This is flare from it. The Canon 85 f1.8 is notorious for this type of flare...the plastic fantastic to an extent. It can be mitigated a bit by using a high quality SMC filter, the more coatings the better. Cheap UV filters are a waste of money, all of my lenses have multi-coated filters.
    http://blog.jasonknauer.com
  • QarikQarik Registered Users Posts: 4,959 Major grins
    edited October 20, 2010
    yup..flare
    D700, D600
    14-24 24-70 70-200mm (vr2)
    85 and 50 1.4
    45 PC and sb910 x2
    http://www.danielkimphotography.com
  • Matthew SavilleMatthew Saville Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 3,352 Major grins
    edited October 20, 2010
    Blurmore wrote: »
    I can tell you exactly what it is...see the three candelabra light on the wall? This is flare from it. The Canon 85 f1.8 is notorious for this type of flare...the plastic fantastic to an extent. It can be mitigated a bit by using a high quality SMC filter, the more coatings the better. Cheap UV filters are a waste of money, all of my lenses have multi-coated filters.
    This is a common looking flare that most primes will exhibit when they are given a spectral light source. You have to be very careful where you place people's faces in a shot when shooting with a lens like that. The flare will always be exactly opposite of dead-center... I think in some viewfinders with some lenses you can see it faintly in the viewfinder, but it's always more pronounced in the actual image...

    =Matt=
    “My first thought is always of light.” – Galen Rowell
    My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
  • wvrockswvrocks Registered Users Posts: 39 Big grins
    edited October 20, 2010
    Matthew is right. The two shots I've attached, although obviously not wedding photos, show a similar phenomena. These were shot with a minolta 50 1.8 prime on a Sony A300. I think there may have been a UV filter too. In my shots the lights were below the subject and the spots show up higher. Your's are exactly opposite. High light source, low spots.


    637634690_cCAyH-M.jpg

    637636015_GmWf3-M.jpg
    Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
  • AgnieszkaAgnieszka Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 3,263 Major grins
    edited October 20, 2010
    Blurmore wrote: »
    I can tell you exactly what it is...see the three candelabra light on the wall? This is flare from it. The Canon 85 f1.8 is notorious for this type of flare...

    thumb.gif

    (Canon rolleyes1.gif I keep having to clean up photos from my second shooter all the time). Chandeliers are killers for Canonians ne_nau.gif
    Angie blog | website | facebook page | google+
  • Moogle PepperMoogle Pepper Registered Users Posts: 2,950 Major grins
    edited October 20, 2010
    Agnieszka wrote: »
    thumb.gif

    (Canon rolleyes1.gif I keep having to clean up photos from my second shooter all the time). Chandeliers are killers for Canonians ne_nau.gif

    nuh uh!
    Food & Culture.
    www.tednghiem.com
  • AgnieszkaAgnieszka Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 3,263 Major grins
    edited October 20, 2010
    Moogle Pepper wrote: »
    nuh uh!

    lol3.gif (you know it's true rolleyes1.gifthumb)
    Angie blog | website | facebook page | google+
  • esc2476esc2476 Registered Users Posts: 354 Major grins
    edited October 20, 2010
    Thanks for the info guys. I am pretty sure I was shooting with my 24-70 2.8 at the time.
    -Eric

    My Gear
    My Websites - Personal     www.ericsmemories.com |"Professional" www.vividphotography.org
    My Favorite Photos - Chicago, NYC, DC, London, Prague, Alaska, Yellowstone, Glacier NP, Vermont, Mt. Rushmore, Badlands NP, The Appalachian Trail
  • esc2476esc2476 Registered Users Posts: 354 Major grins
    edited October 20, 2010
    Very interesting discussion. thumb.gif
    -Eric

    My Gear
    My Websites - Personal     www.ericsmemories.com |"Professional" www.vividphotography.org
    My Favorite Photos - Chicago, NYC, DC, London, Prague, Alaska, Yellowstone, Glacier NP, Vermont, Mt. Rushmore, Badlands NP, The Appalachian Trail
  • quarkquark Registered Users Posts: 510 Major grins
    edited October 21, 2010
    This happens to me (canon) as well. Seem to be worse when I have a UV filter installed on the lens but I don't have any data to support this, just a theory.
    heather dillon photography - Pacific Northwest Portraits and Places
    facebook
    photoblog

    Quarks are one of the two basic constituents of matter in the Standard Model of particle physics.
  • Ed911Ed911 Registered Users Posts: 1,306 Major grins
    edited October 21, 2010
    Agnieszka wrote: »
    lol3.gif (you know it's true rolleyes1.gifthumb)

    You are too funny.


    Odd that it looks like a backward 7...I was first inclided to believe it was a sign of satan...since 7 is generally associated with God...err...well, maybe not satan...but, the god of bad things that happen to otherwise good photos...Laughing.gif

    On the other hand, I can see where this unexpected flare could really cause problems in an there wise nice image.
    Remember, no one may want you to take pictures, but they all want to see them.
    Educate yourself like you'll live forever and live like you'll die tomorrow.

    Ed
  • cj99sicj99si Registered Users Posts: 880 Major grins
    edited October 21, 2010
    Blurmore wrote: »
    I can tell you exactly what it is...see the three candelabra light on the wall? This is flare from it. The Canon 85 f1.8 is notorious for this type of flare...the plastic fantastic to an extent. It can be mitigated a bit by using a high quality SMC filter, the more coatings the better. Cheap UV filters are a waste of money, all of my lenses have multi-coated filters.

    Yup thats it, and it will happen with any lens at the right angle.
Sign In or Register to comment.