Good use of lens flare?

[alt75]

Hi, I took this picture in Botswana recently. I quite like the flare in the picture, but did wonder whether the spot right on the elephant was distracting. I showed the photo to a couple of workmates, not photographically inclined, but they both commented on the flare with one suggesting I could take it to a photo shop to remove it.

What are your thoughts? Is this flare a good thing or a bad thing?

I also have some other pictures from this trip on my flickr page - would be really grateful for any C&C.

Thanks

 

[MacDawg]

I am no photo expert by any definition, but I wouldn't try to remove it
I like the natural look of it

Just my 2¢
I know there are debates around about photo journalism, etc. but I think this is just for your personal enjoyment anyway

 

[allmIne]

As with MacDawg, I'm no expert (though tbh, I think that's actually a good thing, because 99% of the people you show your photos to won't be an expert either!)

I think if it wasn't right on the elephant, it'd be better. That said, I wouldn't bother trying to remove it. It does look natural, and it's still a great photo - love the light!

 

[Bauldrick]

Hiya,

I think the idea of perfecting photos go out the window when you take photos of nature and wildlife, leave the photo as you would see it in real life, thats the beauty of natural photography.
I went on a holiday recently and got plenty of shots that either had slight lens flare or lens flare that was realy obviouse.
Here is one of the only shots that has a lot of lens flare.


Sunset and a little brush tree by Bauldrick, on Flickr

 

[OreoCookie]

I don't like it. If I had the choice, I'd take the photo without lens flare. But it's a matter of taste.

Regarding your question: I think what you should ask yourself: what does the effect add to the picture? Why do I want it in the picture? (Works with anything, not just lens flare).

In this case, I'd rather say that the lens flare doesn't ruin an otherwise good picture. But I think the lens flare doesn't add to the picture, it sucks your eye in and focusses away from the scenery.

Ditto for the second photo, I find the red dot really annoying, my eyes immediately track it. I can't focus properly on the rest of the picture.

 

[PhelpsiPhan]

Looks great!

 

[bocomo]

I don't like it. If I had the choice, I'd take the photo without lens flare. But it's a matter of taste.

Regarding your question: I think what you should ask yourself: what does the effect add to the picture? Why do I want it in the picture? (Works with anything, not just lens flare).

In this case, I'd rather say that the lens flare doesn't ruin an otherwise good picture. But I think the lens flare doesn't add to the picture, it sucks your eye in and focusses away from the scenery.

Ditto for the second photo, I find the red dot really annoying, my eyes immediately track it. I can't focus properly on the rest of the picture.

+1

 

[citizenzen]

+1

+1 +1

Both photos would look better without it.

 

[pintsizemacman]

id get it taken off

 

[alt75]

In this case, I'd rather say that the lens flare doesn't ruin an otherwise good picture. But I think the lens flare doesn't add to the picture, it sucks your eye in and focusses away from the scenery.

OreoCookie- thanks. You make a good point. Pity... I used to like that photo!!

Bauldrick- I do like yours.

Thanks all for your thoughts, much appreciated as always.

 

[Bonch]

Flare just means you can't afford a decent lens, or don't care enough about the photo to fix it in post. Neither is a bad thing if true.