Options

Star filter question

scootacscootac Registered Users Posts: 26 Big grins
edited December 29, 2012 in Accessories
I'm thinking of getting a 6 pt star filter. Are there any big differences between the brand name filters?
I see some are acrylic,,, are they as good as glass? Since this will be used only occasionally,,, is there any other way to get the star effect on camera?

Educate me!

Thanks!
The world is a book, those that do not travel, read but one page.

Comments

  • Options
    Art ScottArt Scott Registered Users Posts: 8,959 Major grins
    edited December 26, 2012
    Optical Glass is the best...does not degrade the image as much as plastic... ... There are sume optical grade plastics that are good also...but they won't be as good as glass... most of the plastic types are the different rectangular styled filters such as Lee and Cokin... however for digital work I would look for digital special effects filters that way absolutely no degradation to image... ... just my very humble opinion ...

    If you do decide to go with a screw in filter...make sure the threads are brass so it dies not seize up and then you ahve to look for filter wrench or channel locks to remove it....speaking from experience here...

    Goode Luck
    "Genuine Fractals was, is and will always be the best solution for enlarging digital photos." ....Vincent Versace ... ... COPYRIGHT YOUR WORK ONLINE ... ... My Website

  • Options
    ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 23,848 moderator
    edited December 27, 2012
    I prefer to add "stars" and "crosses" digitally and in post-production. In Photoshop you just select a brush with the desired shape and color, then vary the brush size to match the situation. (The greater the "glint" or spectral highlight, in the image, the larger the brush size. Setting other brush properties can also vary the effect.)

    i-9JhVvks.jpg

    There is another type of "star" which is created with the combination of strong spectral highlight and small aperture. (You wished to be educated.)

    http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=64419
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • Options
    scootacscootac Registered Users Posts: 26 Big grins
    edited December 27, 2012
    ziggy53 wrote: »
    I prefer to add "stars" and "crosses" digitally and in post-production. In Photoshop you just select a brush with the desired shape and color, then vary the brush size to match the situation. (The greater the "glint" or spectral highlight, in the image, the larger the brush size. Setting other brush properties can also vary the effect.)

    i-9JhVvks.jpg

    There is another type of "star" which is created with the combination of strong spectral highlight and small aperture. (You wished to be educated.)

    http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=64419

    Thanks for the info! No Photoshop here though.
    I read the mentioned thread, but I'm looking for stars from light sources in night photos. Will the small aperture method work for that?
    The world is a book, those that do not travel, read but one page.
  • Options
    ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 23,848 moderator
    edited December 27, 2012
    scootac wrote: »
    Thanks for the info! No Photoshop here though.
    I read the mentioned thread, but I'm looking for stars from light sources in night photos. Will the small aperture method work for that?

    Even the open source and free GIMP will do stars in post (and other effects).

    Nothing wrong with a properly used star filter in the right scene.

    I honestly don't know about using small apertures for night photography. I suppose that it should work in the right circumstances. (Google shows some night examples.)
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • Options
    JCJC Registered Users Posts: 768 Major grins
    edited December 29, 2012
    scootac wrote: »
    Thanks for the info! No Photoshop here though.
    I read the mentioned thread, but I'm looking for stars from light sources in night photos. Will the small aperture method work for that?


    YUP! And I like the look better than star filters- F16:


    i-xs9NxtB-M.jpg
    Yeah, if you recognize the avatar, new user name.
  • Options
    scootacscootac Registered Users Posts: 26 Big grins
    edited December 29, 2012
    kolibri wrote: »
    YUP! And I like the look better than star filters- F16:


    i-xs9NxtB-M.jpg

    THANK YOU!!!clap.gifclapclap.gif
    That's the effect I'm looking for!
    You just saved me 50 bucks!!! :D
    The world is a book, those that do not travel, read but one page.
  • Options
    Art ScottArt Scott Registered Users Posts: 8,959 Major grins
    edited December 29, 2012
    Can the small aperture crosses be achieved with a zoom lens or does it really need to be a prime?
    "Genuine Fractals was, is and will always be the best solution for enlarging digital photos." ....Vincent Versace ... ... COPYRIGHT YOUR WORK ONLINE ... ... My Website

  • Options
    JCJC Registered Users Posts: 768 Major grins
    edited December 29, 2012
    The quality of the star changes with different lenses, besides just the # of rays. I think you have more dispersion with more lens elements, of course, the D in the DO of this lens could also be having an effect. (Previous image was with the 35mm f/1.4 prime, I think they are replacing this lens? I can't imagine why, to my mind it's perfect. Canon must have a some super resolution sensors in the pipeline)

    F18 with a 70-300 DO:
    Yeah, if you recognize the avatar, new user name.
  • Options
    scootacscootac Registered Users Posts: 26 Big grins
    edited December 29, 2012
    Interesting!
    I'll give both my zoom and 50mm 1.4 a try and see how they differ!

    Here's the type of photo I'll be working with. Want to replace the 'halo' with a star around the street lights.

    DSC_2702.JPG
    The world is a book, those that do not travel, read but one page.
Sign In or Register to comment.