Talk:Lens flare

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Filmmaking task force.

Glass

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Glass, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of glass on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GlassWikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Taskforces/GlassTemplate:WikiProject Glassglass articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Error?[edit]

Lens flare is always an error in the lens system. That is, it is a situation where the lens does not accurately reproduce (at its output) the input signal.

Sometimes the error is used for artistic effects.

Atlant 11:18, 13 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

True enough! And this should be explained in the article. But starting with "Lens flare is an error that may occur..." could give the impression that its appearance is always a mistake, which is not the case. --Rick Sidwell 22:14, 13 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You understand that when I say "error", I'm speaking technically. But give it some thought (as I will) and we'll come up with some appropriate wording.

Atlant 22:32, 13 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Artificial lens flare is a common effect in various graphics editing programs, although its use can be a point of contention among professional graphic designers." Why? Because it's considered cheesy/over used? Tc morris 04:10, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Diffraction artifact[edit]

I created a chapter about a distinct type of artefact on digital pictures. I never saw this type of artefact/flare described elsewhere. I can prove that the rainbows on the picture are not lens flare, but I don't know where else to describe this. Does it deserve a separate page? Emmanuelm 02:28, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you never saw this type of artifact/flare described elsewhere, then this may not be the right place to reason about it. Mbhsb (talk) 18:36, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lamps as stars?[edit]

Is the effect shown in, for example, this image also called a lens flare? I mean the lamps showing up as stars with six arms? --ZeroOne (talk | @) 22:33, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, that isn't lens flare -- it's diffraction caused by the aperture blades of the lens used to take the picture. -- Moondigger 20:21, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding images[edit]

I've significantly changed the layout of the images in this article, since I found it extremely distracting. I've also removed one of the 6(!) images, since I felt it did not add any significant value in addition to the other five. I still think 5 images is a lot for a start-class article, although it's better than six.

Anyway, feel free to revert if you find that I was wrong in doing so. Sir Link 08:19, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images Layout[edit]

Is it possible to alter the layout of the last set of images on this page?

It's fairly chaotic and untidy having them all down the right hand side, particularly as it artificially stretches the "external links" heading. I've noticed many other articles have images in the main body of the text, so it's not without precedent.

I'm certainly not suggesting a return to the earlier design tidied up by Sir Link, but perhaps a subheading at the end called "Examples of Lens Flare" with images which don't directly relate to any particular subheading put together in series.

I put this as a suggestion here because my Wiki editing skills aren't sufficient to make the change myself, (i.e. I don't want to make a mess of the article) so I'd rather let someone more expert have a go, if they consider it appropriate.

D Damage (talk) 02:16, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]