What Happened in this Image?

[ornate_wrasse]

I captured this image yesterday when shooting an exhibit at the Willamette Heritage Center in Salem, OR. It was taken with my M9 and my Nikkor SC 50mm 1.4. It was taken inside a room where there were exhibits of period clothing. None of the other images I took in this room had the distinct circles, as this one has. In addition to finding out what happened and why, I would also be interested if this is considered a "bad" image by most photographers.

Thanks for any input.

Ellen

 

[Ranchu]

Reflections of other humans or whatever off the glass? I don't like calling other people's pictures bad images, what do I know, but I don't like the reflections, and the angle isn't my favorite..maybe stopping down a little to get more lens performance and depth of field would have been good..

edi: oh, I just saw you're talking about the light balls, those are reflections of lights. I thought you meant the smudgy quality in the front of the garment!

 

[Dwig]

I captured this image yesterday when shooting an exhibit at the Willamette Heritage Center in Salem, OR. It was taken with my M9 and my Nikkor SC 50mm 1.4. It was taken inside a room where there were exhibits of period clothing. None of the other images I took in this room had the distinct circles, as this one has....

They're reflections of lights, likely track lights, reflecting off the display case glass. Since the camera>glass>lights distance is significantly greater than the camera>fabric distance, at which you focused, the reflections are out of focus. Judging from the "smearing" of the reflections, you were at somewhat of an angle to the surface of the glass. A slight change in angle would, of course, move the reflections relative to the subject so other shots from different positions won't show the same reflections.

 

[Hsg]

Its not a bad image and its not a good image, its an unsuccessful image. The blown highlights are too prominent and secondly the square crop does not fit the subject.

 

[jaapv]

As you are asking about the rest of the image, I fear I am not quite impressed. It lacks impact/contrast and it is not quite sharp, possibly due to the glass in between or motion blur, so the fine structure of the fabric has been lost.
With a shot like this your technique must bring out the finest detail - and your gear is quite capable of that.

Then we can get into composition etc. 😉

 

[FrankS]

This image isn't being presented for critique, OP just wants to know about the bright circles near the top.

As suggested, I too think they're reflections of lights in the plate glass you are shooting through.

Reflections with the filter glass on the camera lens is also possible but I've never seen that and don't know how that looks. Anyone?

 

[ornate_wrasse]

Thanks everyone for your explanations of the circles of light in my image and your feedback on the image. I am a bit puzzled, however, by the references to the glass I was shooting through. In fact, there was no glass in this exhibit. There was nothing between me and what I was photographing. Here are two more images I took in the same exhibit area. As you can see, they do not exhibit the circles that are in the first image:

I did post-process the image with the circles in Lightroom and I'm guessing my post-processing could be improved. I'll go back and try again.

Again, thanks for the valuable feedback.

Ellen

 

[FrankS]

If there was no glass window between you and the subject, then the reflections could have been caused by a filter on the lens. Was there a filter on the lens?

 

[ornate_wrasse]

Was there a filter on the lens?

There was no filter on the lens, to answer your question.

 

[sevo]

A filter and significant spotlight from a flat angle, or no filter and extremely intense spotlight could have a similar effect, by creating reflections between lens and filter or in-lens. Or some bright or reflective object (a silver wrist band, pearl necklace, strips of tinsel, or even a brightly illuminated bit of nylon thread) right in front of the lens could cause it - were there any other people around you which might accidentally have obstructed the lens, or did you photograph through or around an obstacle?

 

[jaapv]

This image isn't being presented for critique, OP just wants to know about the bright circles near the top.

I would also be interested if this is considered a "bad" image by most photographers

...................

 

[ornate_wrasse]

A filter and significant spotlight from a flat angle, or no filter and extremely intense spotlight could have a similar effect, …

- were there any other people around you which might accidentally have obstructed the lens, or did you photograph through or around an obstacle?

There was only one other person in the room, but she was not near me so could not have obstructed the lens. Also, I did not photograph through or around an obstacle.

Looking back, and trying to reconstruct this, I remember an intense spotlight on the ceiling aimed directly at the clothing I was photographing. Perhaps it was from this spotlight.

 

[Dwig]

... I am a bit puzzled, however, by the references to the glass I was shooting through. In fact, there was no glass in this exhibit....

Tis a puzzlement...

The original image shows a number of hallmarks of having been shot through glass:

• The large spots/reflections show significant chromatic aberration orientated along an axis that would correspond with the surface of a glass "window".
• There are a number of small out of focus spots (at top near hanger) that would indicate something more brightly illuminated than the area around the hanger and at a different distance
• There are a number of small white lint or dust spots around the dark fabric that don't appear to have the same degree of (un)focus as the fabric. These also get less sharp toward the bottom where the surface of a glass window would be closer to the camera.

Also, the first shot is of a object that appears to be in a shallow recess or display case where the other shots appear to be of manikins that are out in the open. Could that one piece have been in a glass faced case?

 

[BlackXList]

The top photo is 100% shot through glass.

The lack of contrast between this image and the others is consistent with being shot through glass, & you can even see the photographer's reflection in the bottom of the image.

The reflections of the lighting on top are exactly consistent with how it would look from glass, (I've always found reflections from filters go at an axis to the actual lighting, so it's not that), and you can see water spots from cleaning on the glass at the top of the image.

 

[FrankS]

...................

Ah, thanks. I missed that. Sorry!
Having missed it, I was quite surprised at the negative comments.:angel:

 

[Rob-F]

The top photo is 100% shot through glass.

The lack of contrast between this image and the others is consistent with being shot through glass, & you can even see the photographer's reflection in the bottom of the image.

The reflections of the lighting on top are exactly consistent with how it would look from glass, (I've always found reflections from filters go at an axis to the actual lighting, so it's not that), and you can see water spots from cleaning on the glass at the top of the image.

I concur with that. I think Ellen probably took a lot of photos, most of which were not through glass, and she must have just forgotten that this one is through glass. It has all the signs of it, as noted.

The solution here would have been to use a polarizer.

 

[ornate_wrasse]

I think Ellen probably took a lot of photos, most of which were not through glass, and she must have just forgotten that this one is through glass

I hang my head in shame 😱

That is exactly what happened. I took a lot of photos, the great majority of them not through glass. I apparently forgot that this one was through glass. I apologize for my sinful deed 🙂

Thank you, fellow RFF members, for being so alert and pointing out what indeed happened here. FWIW, here is the original, unprocessed image, straight out of the M9:

Ellen

 

[f2bthere]

It is an easy mistake to make.

To see the light reflected, the angle of the light to the subject (in this case the glass) and the angle of the camera to the subject (the place on the glass) is the same (angle of incidence = angle of reflection). In the real world, we rarely have lasers as a light source, so the light is directed in a variety of angles (a "family of angles") and the surface the light is reflected on can increase the number of angles (such as a water drop).

By slightly shifting the position or angle of your camera, you can often get rid of this problem.

An environment with many bright light sources which are small relative to the subject can be especially problematic for reflections (as here) and lens flare.

Alas, rangefinders are often even less helpful for noticing this while exposing. In such environments, it's good to check while you can still re-expose.

 

[jaapv]

Ah, thanks. I missed that. Sorry!
Having missed it, I was quite surprised at the negative comments.:angel:

Well, negative... Meant as constructive.

 

[Phantomas]

If you look closely you will see the reflection of the photographer in the glass. So definitely glass.