Lens Flare/Halo Effect -- Throughout Entire Film?!

[jgdst]

To be honest, I wasn't overly keen on them in the first trailer. Over the course of the film, I'll probably not even think of them, so it's a moot point

However, judging by the trailer, it struck me as being mostly a post-production thing rather than anything to do with the lenses being used. Isn't Spock's transporter effect covered in mini lens-flares?

 

[Kpnuts]

Yep, it's clearly a technique Abrams likes and you'll be seeing lots of it throughout the film, as the report said.

Personally, I don't mind it at all.

 

[PixelMagic]

Transformers has these flares a lot. And yes, it is the result of shooting with anamorphic lenses. It causes light sources to have these artifacts. If you watch Mission Impossible 3, you will notice J.J. likes to use these artistically in his shots. Michael Bay is known to do this as well.

Here are some examples of the flares in other films.

 

[trevanian]

Uhh...

You know that lens flare/halo thing we've seen in the trailer?

Well I was just reading Dark Horizons, and they comment on the new logo from end of last week and...

Maybe Abrams is using that 'brilliant' technique of Roger Christian's from BATTLEFIELD EARTH to point up the differences between real TOS and this thing's universe. B:E shot everything with a dutched camera until the humans win (so he said: I didn't see the movie all the way through), at which point the camera straightens up. Maybe the lens flares are a visual representation to the audience of the clouded timeline, now wouldn't that be artistic (sorry, is the word autistic.) I shouldn't be giving all these mystery science theater jokes away so early in the game.

Or - and here is a really controversial thought - they are just the normal lens flares you get all the time using anamorphic lenses.

If so ... and now I'm not being facetious ... WHY the preponderance of flare shots in the trailer? You lose the impact with overuse, just like zoom lenses, which is why folks like McTiernan used them very specifically rather than as a constant.

 

[ST-One]

Maybe Abrams is using that 'brilliant' technique of Roger Christian's from BATTLEFIELD EARTH to point up the differences between real TOS and this thing's universe. B:E shot everything with a dutched camera until the humans win (so he said: I didn't see the movie all the way through), at which point the camera straightens up. Maybe the lens flares are a visual representation to the audience of the clouded timeline, now wouldn't that be artistic (sorry, is the word autistic.) I shouldn't be giving all these mystery science theater jokes away so early in the game.

Or - and here is a really controversial thought - they are just the normal lens flares you get all the time using anamorphic lenses.

If so ... and now I'm not being facetious ... WHY the preponderance of flare shots in the trailer? You lose the impact with overuse, just like zoom lenses, which is why folks like McTiernan used them very specifically rather than as a constant.

Probably because the camera can today be 'present' in shots. And the lights' interaction with the lenses creates that effect quite effectively.

There were also shots in the trailer with only very minute or no lens flares. But in most of the action-oriented shots that we've been shown there are very strong light sources present: the Kelvin's warp-thruster, the shuttles' 'head-lights', the sun.

 

[trevanian]

Or - and here is a really controversial thought - they are just the normal lens flares you get all the time using anamorphic lenses.

If so ... and now I'm not being facetious ... WHY the preponderance of flare shots in the trailer? You lose the impact with overuse, just like zoom lenses, which is why folks like McTiernan used them very specifically rather than as a constant.

Probably because the camera can today be 'present' in shots. And the lights' interaction with the lenses creates that effect quite effectively.

There were also shots in the trailer with only very minute or no lens flares. But in most of the action-oriented shots that we've been shown there are very strong light sources present: the Kelvin's warp-thruster, the shuttles' 'head-lights', the sun.

And of course, the bridge.

The film's production designer didn't mention much about the preponderance of practicals on that set or in the corridors (so perhaps that thing about having all the spotlights was more the DP's idea? I haven't talked to the DP yet), but he did say that the bridge was the most trouble for him to nail down on the film and it took three passes before everybody was happy (he went too futuristic the first time, way too much like TOS the second time, and then I guess struck what was a happy medium for the makers on the last try.)

 

[ancient]

I'm not sure what the appeal of the glare thing is, but I hope it's not too distracting.

 

[Nardpuncher]

I'm not sure what the appeal of the glare thing is, but I hope it's not too distracting.

I'm one of those who wouldn't really notice it until it's brought to my attention. Thanks a lot Frontier!

 

[Tranya_2K9]

You know, I thought it was just me and my brother said I'm crazy as hell, but I've noticed these frakkin lens flares come up in just about every episode of Fringe. Watch tomorrow night and you'll catch at least one or two.

It would appear JJ seems to have a hard-on for lens flare. Maybe not so much for Lost though. But Fringe and ST definitely have it.

 

[Aragorn]

^ If you watch Fringe tomorrow night, you'll just see a bunch of aspiring singers being ripped apart by judges.

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

Where can I buy an official Star Trek Somb-Flare-O?

And can somebody make me a cool avatar with a sombrero and some flare? (I feel like I'm in "Office Space.") The more obnoxious, the better.

 

[ncc-1017-e]

Uhh...

You know that lens flare/halo thing we've seen in the trailer?

Well I was just reading Dark Horizons, and they comment on the new logo from end of last week and...

The upcoming reboot of "Star Trek" has gotten new logo art that adds in the lens flare/halo effect prevalent throughout the film.

I hope to god Garth wrote that wrong.

I hope to god Abrams didn't do what I'm beginning to think he may have done.

That the entire movie will have that damn effect throughout the film...

Examples (and I'm TrekCore staff, so I'm allowed to hot-link :P)

http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/xi/screencaps/trailer/trailer042.jpg
http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/xi/screencaps/trailer/trailer058.jpg
http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/xi/screencaps/trailer/trailer070.jpg

See how it looks like someone needs to clean the lens? Or their glasses? Or the screen?

...That'll get old real quick.

Well if the bridge set did not have all those stupid lights shine in everyones faces then there would not be any lens flares! It looks like sh*t!

 

[SalvorHardin]

Hmm...so as people have indicated those lens flares were present in Mission Impossible 3, Transformers and Fringe.

Since, as far as i remember, I barely noticed and don't remember being annoyed by them in those movies/show I think I will be fine when watching Star Trek.

 

[datas_cat_spot]

I've watched every episode of Fringe so far, and I haven't noticed anything. They must be doing it wrong.