Lens Flare 101

MODS: feel free to move if this isn't in the appropriate place.

I have seen several countless threads on NIBIRU. My personal beliefs or lack there of are irrelevant to THIS particular thread in which I intent to provide EVIDENCE of...LENS FLARES!!!

Most all of us here are quite aware and have seen the pictures of the "second sun" acclaimed by NIBIRU believers/watchers. I have yet to see any picture evidence that has not been thoroughly debunked as a lens flare but they seem to persist on these forums due to ignorance.

Ignorance of how to spot and identify a lens flare.

Below are some pictures I went out and randomly took to show what a "Lens Flare" looks like if anything were to look like a "second sun" or "nibiru" THIS would be it:










similar yes?
Real?
Absolutely not.

This picture:


was posted regarding this thread:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
of many very very similar miss identifications of a "lens flare"

I guess the purpose of this thread is to:

A) provide proof of lens flares to those who aren't convinced of them lol
B) illustrate the similarities between a lens flare and what "nibiru" is perceived to look like.
C) educate to some degree anyone interested in taking pictures of "nibiru" how to identify your "lens flare"
D) reduce the amount of threads posted claiming a lens flare is Nibiru...

This is a clear picture of the sun with no NIBIRU or lens flare:


(pictures were taken with smoke overcast from AZ fires which reduced the brightness of the sun and eliminated the glare on the lens of the camera)

thanks for the thread and helping clear up lense flares and sun dogs


im curious though whats that chopper thing in the bottom of the first pic?

Originally posted by seedofchucky
thanks for the thread and helping clear up lense flares and sun dogs


im curious though whats that chopper thing in the bottom of the first pic?

that is actually a helicopter that was flying by when I took the pic...what are the odds lol

S&F

There is too much paranoia about Nibiru going around. If its big enough to catch on camera, I'm sure some astronomer somewhere would have seen it by now.

Yup im constantly telling people about lens flare, posting links to sources that explain it and posting pics showing the similarities between their pics.

Dont waste your time....regardless of whatever evidence you present they will continue to believe there is a brown dwarf bearing down on us....and that they have photographed it.

I was in a thread earlier where basically the person had used the wrong settings on their camera and ended up with blue pics...i told them what it was (improper white balance setting) gave them links to sites which explained the blue tint.........but the OP then dismissed everything i had said and asked if Phage would come and answer.

Some people are just ignorant....they wont take your advice...my advice...no ones advice. They convince themselves they are right.

Oh yea...and they invert the pic and claim the flare is a solid object...that one never fails to make me giggle lol.

Your a big fat liar, those pictures are of Nibru.Stop giving out disinformation

What I think is funny is when people start howling 'lens flare' or 'camera anomaly' when some one sees something with the naked eye and no camera was even used in the first place. I seen things and told people about them and the very first thing out of there stupid months is 'lens flare' or 'camera anomaly' and I have to tell them LISTEN YOU STUPID FOOL THERE WAS NO CAMERA, I SEEN THIS WITH THE NAKED EYE!!!

I have seen a lot of things since I became a member of ATS ( and a lot before as well) that I would love to tell on here but I do not waste my time because as soon as I do some fool will be howling 'lens flare' or 'camera anomaly' and will not be able to get it though their heads that a camera was not involved.

Yes, a great deal of the photos are nothing but a 'lens flare' or 'camera anomaly' but not all of them.

Originally posted by fixer1967
What I think is funny is when people start howling 'lens flare' or 'camera anomaly' when some one sees something with the naked eye and no camera was even used in the first place. I seen things and told people about them and the very first thing out of there stupid months is 'lens flare' or 'camera anomaly' and I have to tell them LISTEN YOU STUPID FOOL THERE WAS NO CAMERA, I SEEN THIS WITH THE NAKED EYE!!!

I have seen a lot of things since I became a member of ATS ( and a lot before as well) that I would love to tell on here but I do not waste my time because as soon as I do some fool will be howling 'lens flare' or 'camera anomaly' and will not be able to get it though their heads that a camera was not involved.

Yes, a great deal of the photos are nothing but a 'lens flare' or 'camera anomaly' but not all of them.

Your naked eye can also produce the same things....your eyes work in a similar way to a camera lens.

I know you do not want to hear that...but its true

I would say most, if not all things like this can be explained if the person telling the story keeps to the facts rather than spicing it up with fiction.

Originally posted by fixer1967
What I think is funny is when people start howling 'lens flare' or 'camera anomaly' when some one sees something with the naked eye and no camera was even used in the first place. I seen things and told people about them and the very first thing out of there stupid months is 'lens flare' or 'camera anomaly' and I have to tell them LISTEN YOU STUPID FOOL THERE WAS NO CAMERA, I SEEN THIS WITH THE NAKED EYE!!!

I have seen a lot of things since I became a member of ATS ( and a lot before as well) that I would love to tell on here but I do not waste my time because as soon as I do some fool will be howling 'lens flare' or 'camera anomaly' and will not be able to get it though their heads that a camera was not involved.

Yes, a great deal of the photos are nothing but a 'lens flare' or 'camera anomaly' but not all of them.

If you could produce a photo of NIBIRU without any glare at all such as through a layer of fog or smoke etc I would be more convinced however the broad daylight unhindered photo of the sun is what 99% of all nibiru photos are of and those also have a 99% lens flare rate...

reply to post by Sly1one


So, if Nibiru WAS out there, what could we expect that to look like? A lens flare, or...? How do you think we could tell the difference? Could you offer some tips? I mean looking at a photo... Not in real life. What do you personally think the difference would be on a photo if someone showed you one and it was Nemesis (star) or Nibiru (planet)?

One thing you'll notice is that pictures alleging a lens flare to be Nibiru (or whatever) always show the Sun - if the object really existed, it should be possible to take a photo of it in which the Sun does not appear. Obviously, cropped images don't count!

Originally posted by AndyMayhew
One thing you'll notice is that pictures alleging a lens flare to be Nibiru (or whatever) always show the Sun - if the object really existed, it should be possible to take a photo of it in which the Sun does not appear. Obviously, cropped images don't count!

Last Saturday I was messing with my son's phone taking some video of "nibiru". I didn't think much of it at the time and deleted it. Anyway my point that your comment reminded me that as I turned the cam slowly towards the Sun I could clearly see a distinct sphere on the screen before the Sun was in frame. It was clearly a reflection as I could make it disappear by blocking the light without covering the "object" itself.

To be clear, a fake second sun could be shown without the Sun in the pic.

About time we had a lens flare thread. Just got a new 60d and playing with the lenses I'm noticing some really cool flares and blobs of light.

It's a great camera for night time filming too. I might do a vid of planes at night. They make better looking ufos than most of the ones folk are screaming about on youtube.

Originally posted by 3n19m470
reply to post by Sly1one

 

So, if Nibiru WAS out there, what could we expect that to look like? A lens flare, or...? How do you think we could tell the difference? Could you offer some tips? I mean looking at a photo... Not in real life. What do you personally think the difference would be on a photo if someone showed you one and it was Nemesis (star) or Nibiru (planet)?

If an dwarf-planet or something WAS out there near the sun, I honestly don't know what you would see but I would bet the farm that it wouldn't be exactly the same as a lens flare...