There's pretty much zero chance of a double exposure---the film came out of its packaging, went in the camera, went straight through in a day, and got an identifying label stuck in the canister with it when it came out. (And I saw no rainbows that day; it was uniformly grey from dawn to dusk.)
So while it may be possible for the image of a "real" rainbow to look like that, I'm willing to exclude that possibility from consideration.
-NT
Nathan Tenny
San Diego, CA, USA
Although the moon is smaller than the earth, they are about the same distance apart.
NT, does this "rainbow" continue past the frame and into the sprocket holes and frame number?
Good question, but I don't know the answer as I got the slides back mounted. I just went and had a close look at the slide but really couldn't tell.
Has this happened before?
No, and as far as I can think, everything about the equipment and processing is identical to things I've done a million times. (The processor is a pro lab with a good reputation; I use the camera all the dang time and lately this lens has lived on it.) Nothing unusual about the rest of the roll either.
I'm inclined to think it almost has to be a flare-like event that happened at exposure, but I still think the optical coincidence that produces a tight little spectrum like that, with no significant flare effects otherwise, is pretty striking.
I mean, normally when you see a rainbow effect from flare, it's hazy at the edges and accompanied by other obvious flare artifacts. Here I see some lightening to the right of the rainbow in the upper part of the image, against the dark ceiling, but it doesn't seem to cause much loss of contrast, which normally is kind of the definition of flare.
I say it's weird! :-)
-NT
Nathan Tenny
San Diego, CA, USA
Although the moon is smaller than the earth, they are about the same distance apart.
If the image extends beyond the frame, then it could have been introduced by the processor. If not, then flare seems to be an explanation. However, I am at a loss to how such a pattern is made.
The brightest part of this image is the rainbow. (BTW, I am no rainbow photographer.)
Hikari
You're right, but even in this image there is enough to leave more than just the rainbow in a double exposure. However, your suggestion about a processing error is intriguing.
Does the Bessa-R + Nikkor 50/f2 combination have any problems such as internal reflections from rear element? It looks like quite an elegant form of chroma maybe through internal reflection, flare, shifting light... very different to the usual flare spots that are making a vogue comeback amongst landscape photographers.
.::Garyh
♦
Canon EOS1N ('Brutus', 1993—), TS-E 24mm f3.5L, 20mm f2.8, 17-40 f4L, 70-200 f2.8L
Pentax 67 ('Pentaximus', 2010—) + SMCP 45mm f4, 55mm f4 & 165mm f4LS;
Zero Image 6x9 multi-format pinhole (2008—); Sekonic L758D;
Olympus XA, Nikon Coolpix P7700
"If you're not having fun, then you're not doing it right!"
♦
“Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”
Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2
No filter, no hood. Essentially all the light is artificial; the room is pretty dim (it was late afternoon on a cloudy day, and there are minimal windows in the upper gallery where this was taken), but off to the right of the frame there are in fact several light sources (the lighting for a photo exhibition).
I do think I see some lightening to the right of the "rainbow", especially at the top of the frame---however, I'm pretty sure that the "map of Africa" shape in that area is actual discolouration on the ceiling, not a light artifact.
Supposing it were a processing issue, is there a plausible mechanism? This frame is in the middle of the roll, for what that's worth. I don't know how Chrome do their E-6 process.
-NT
Nathan Tenny
San Diego, CA, USA
Although the moon is smaller than the earth, they are about the same distance apart.
Adv Reply
Originally Posted by Hikari
