Why is it that the worst flair is caused by bright objects just BEYOND the field of view? For example, I've found it's often safer to photograph a bright object slightly in-frame and to crop it out in printing than to crop it out in-camera and risk a the band of flair it may cause.
This problem seems to come up quite often in my shooting and I've always wondered why it happens and how to avoid it.
BTW, for an extraordinary example of this effect, watch the "Jupiter & Beyond" section of Kubrick's "2001" (which was on last night and brought the question to mind -- great flick).
I have a home made filter and lens shade holder that has never let me down. It consists of a thin metal plate that fits on to the camera and in turn screws into the tripod with the camera. On each side of the plate is a plastic threaded socket where I can screw in a 12" to 15" flexible tube with a clip attached. One clip holds any filter I wish to use and the other hold a piece of flat black card that acts as lens shade. The flexible tube is normally used on lathes to carry cooling fluid to the cutting head. I get some strange looks as I wander around the this attachment on my camera, for in addition to it looking like a Cheviot Tup with curved horns (a local male sheep), it is also a mix of rather vivid colours. However, I never have problems when shooting directly into the light and can quickly change filters.
I'm sure you're right, Les, that it's just a matter of better lens shading. The few sheep we get in this area are probably unspeakably spoken for, so I'll have to come up with some solution of my own.
ok, excuse my ignorance if this is not right. But if you click on the post reply, there is an icon at top of the box that has IMG in it. Isn't that what you use to select an image for the reply?
Linear Mode
