what's 'wrong' with vignetting?

[back alley]

i was looking at ferider's post about his new canon 28/2.8 lens and it started me thinking about images that show darkening at the edges.

it seems to me that this is generally considered by many to be a 'flaw' in the lens. but i also notice that some like this affect and do it on purpose or look for these older lenses on purpose.

i'm wondering how it came to be that this affect got it's negative connotation and i'm also wondering if this is still the prevalent attitude out there?

who likes the look of the dark corners?

joe

[kully]

As with anything one persons defects are another's characteristic.

For example - my low-contrast, glowy Summitar that is soft wide open. As with vignetting there are times when these are nice, and other when they are not.

[raid]

Vignetting is something that I like to have as an option when using older lenses. It draws the focus to the center which is slightly lighter than the edges. I am glad that some of the older lenses provide vignetting.

[ferider]

I like it for a vintage look, Joe, much like a Sonnar's center punch.

It's difficult to correct in software after scanning, so I'm trying to avoid it with modern stuff, landscapes and such.

Roland.

[maddoc]

I don't care much about vignetting as long as it doesn't distract to much from the subject.

[back alley]

just want to point out that i do not see it as a flaw.

[gavinlg]

In work related use I detest vignetting. My canon 17-40 f4L vignettes like a prick at even f11 and annoys the crap out of me.

In personal stuff I like the vignette.

Weird huh?

[Merkin]

Vignetting is considered by "artistes" to be "bad design" because it pushes your eye toward the center of a piece, and putting the main subject in the center is also considered "bad design." This is a highly dogmatic view that is drilled in to the vast majority of freshman fine arts students at colleges all over the place, often by professors who don't realize that the main purpose of "design rules" is to give students the knowledge of when, where, and why to break them when appropriate. Instead, "design rules" are treated very dogmatically and strictly, almost as a "ten commandments of art." Personally, I think vignetting works much better on square images than rectangular, and I think dark vignetting works much better than light vignetting, a la wedding portraits. I also think that vignetting not caused by a lens looks contrived the vast majority of the time. Vignetting applied in photoshop, in the darkroom, or by something like the Holga 135 BC, which uses black plastic in the corners of the frame, generally looks poor in my opinion.

In general, it is a good idea to do things like observe the rule of thirds, not clip corners, avoid vignetting, etc, but if every image observed every rule, our images would be incredibly boring.

[antiquark]

If you crop your pictures, vignetting might lead to one dark corner and one light corner, which isn't really a popular effect these days.

[Merkin]

If you crop your pictures, vignetting might lead to one dark corner and one light corner, which isn't really a popular effect these days.

Nor is it, in my opinion, particularly aesthetically pleasing, regardless of popularity. The difficulty with a lens that vignettes is that there is very little flexibility in cropping the image. With a square neg, if you want to crop to a portrait oriented rectangle, you pretty much have to crop an equal amount off of the right and left sides, or the vignetting looks wonky. With a 35mm neg, if you are cropping to 8x10, in landscape you have to again take the very center of the image, and if you are cropping in portrait, chopping off the bottom generally works the best. Because of all of this, composition is more difficult.

[Gumby]

Vignetting is considered by "artistes" to be "bad design" because it pushes your eye toward the center of a piece, and putting the main subject in the center is also considered "bad design." This is a highly dogmatic view (yadda yadda)

Maybe... but many B&W artists put in the vignetting at printing and don't really consider themselves to be violating any design rules. Ever looked at one, any one, of AAs prints... or read "The Print"?

I believe the general avoidance of lenses that vignette is to allow the artist to choose to add vignetting of the final print rather than allowing the lens to force vignetting.

[MCTuomey]

it's another variable in one's tool bag. i tend to think the use of any dark background as a form of vignetting, or vice versa. can't say whether it's good or bad, in general. depends on the photo, i think.

[Al Kaplan]

A lot of us "edge burn" our prints in the darkroom, but often some edges get more burn than others, and features within the picture may also get darkened a bit by selective burning in.

[Sam N]

You can always add the light falloff by dodging your print or using software, but it's more difficult (although very possible) to remove the light falloff. Heavy vignetting is just ugly IMO.

On the flip side, it's easier to make a tiny lens if you allow a slightly smaller image circle and some more falloff (CV 15/4.5, 21/4). These lenses are both excellent in many other respects.

The Sigma 50/1.4 (77mm threads) for SLRs is far bigger than Nikon/Canon 50/1.4s (58mm or less), the main reason Sigma went with the larger size was to avoid vignetting.

[Merkin]

Maybe... but many B&W artists put in the vignetting at printing and don't really consider themselves to be violating any design rules. Ever looked at one, any one, of AAs prints... or read "The Print"?

I believe the general avoidance of lenses that vignette is to allow the artist to choose to add vignetting of the final print rather than allowing the lens to force vignetting.

I didn't say that vignetting as a post process was fundamentally wrong, I just said that I don't particularly like it, and yes, I was raised on All Ansel Adams All The Time by my father, who believes that the eighth deadly sin is to use an aperture larger than f/11.

Also, there are loads of photographers out there who have never taken a general two dimensional design course, so they might not be familiar with a lot of the rules that are taught in that setting.

Personally, I believe that Photography is more fundamentally different from the other two dimensional visual arts than most people in the "art world" do, particularly those in the higher art education field. There are many people out there who feel that photographs should follow the same set of rules as paintings or graphic design/printmaking pieces, and I disagree with that. I left art school because of one particular professor who, despite telling me to my face that he didn't think photography was an art, insisted that every photograph i printed had to follow every one of his fourteen rules of good two dimensional design. After that semester, I shot with nothing but holgas for a couple of years, just to wash his BS out of my system.

As an aside, the (yadda yadda) was wholly unnecessary. You may not have meant any disrespect, but it certainly seemed quite disrespectful on this end. If you want to clip out only a portion of my comment, do so, and if you want to make a statement about the validity, accuracy, usefulness, or interestingness of the rest of my comment, come out and say it.

[Gabriel M.A.]

There's nothing wrong with vignetting itself, specially when that's what you want or don't mind it. There's something wrong, though, when you don't want it and there's nothing you can do about it without Photoshop.

I'd also say there's nothing wrong with curry; it'd be wrong if what you ordered was a chocolate cake.

[Gumby]

an aside, the (yadda yadda) was wholly unnecessary. You may not have meant any disrespect, but it certainly seemed quite disrespectful on this end. If you want to clip out only a portion of my comment, do so, and if you want to make a statement about the validity, accuracy, usefulness, or interestingness of the rest of my comment, come out and say it.

Oy veh... you must be having a "sensitive" day. :rolleyes:

No disrespect was intended... was there anything in my reply that indicated such?.

[ferider]

One more comment: a vignetting lens typically "flattens out" when closed down. So there is still enough creative flexibility (when there is enough light).

For example, most of Winogrand's shots are looking flat, likely shot at f8 or so. But some show (in my mind) creative use of vignetting, for example:

http://blogs.nyu.edu/blogs/emd5/pi2/Winograndcolor.jpg

Cheers,

Roland.

[Merkin]

Oy veh... you must be having a "sensitive" day. :rolleyes:

No disrespect was intended... was there anything in my reply that indicated such?.

It's all good. Where I'm from, "yadda yadda" is generally used to indicate useless information. As I said, I didn't think any disrespect was meant, but I am having one of those days where I don't put up with any crap. If I ever encounter you in real life, I'll buy you a beer.

[craygc]

Interesting as I deliberately forced light fall off on to a few images I processed lately

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3466/3363307690_82f90dccb7.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3421/3364130761_20acd5b33d.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3563/3365666984_6e4413f608.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3660/3365886884_cf36fa18ac.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3474/3371629573_7aab7ae960.jpg

Seems I got a little carried away with how many I did :eek:

[Gumby]

If I ever encounter you in real life, I'll buy you a beer.

... and I'll buy you two to wash the first down with! :)

[Sam N]

It's all good. Where I'm from, "yadda yadda" is generally used to indicate useless information. As I said, I didn't think any disrespect was meant, but I am having one of those days where I don't put up with any crap. If I ever encounter you in real life, I'll buy you a beer.

Have you seen this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Yada_Yada
:D

[Joe Brugger]

just want to point out that i do not see it as a flaw.

At the risk of being a PITA, vignetting is what you get when the shade for the 35 gets put on the 24 -- loss of light at the frame edges because the lens is shaded. Easy to control or eliminate.

Light fall-off from wide angle designs in harder to get rid of, and it works well in some pictures but not in others.

[morback]

I like vignette. I almost always darken my corners, but not always all 4:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3556/3338818555_e2ea6c8aec.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3374/3178919024_c8b6a05a8f.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3396/3345751964_ea223dc835.jpg

I find it settles the image much better and keeps your eyes from wondering off without necessarily "forcing" them to the center.

[FallisPhoto]

i'm wondering how it came to be that this affect got it's negative connotation and i'm also wondering if this is still the prevalent attitude out there?

who likes the look of the dark corners?

joe

I think that it isn't so much that it is "wrong" as it is that you don't have the choice whether to have it or not. With a lens that doesn't have vignetting, it is pretty simple to add it later if you want it.

[shadowfox]

First off, I almost always like vignetting.

I don't think vignetting puts the subject in the center, to me, it acts more as a buffer between the center of the picture (not necessarily the subject) and the edges. Much like a good frame/border does.

Some pictures look good with the edge sharp and bright, more often not.

Besides, my XA cameras are lean-mean-vignetting machines ;)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3581/3324309824_f606d2ebc3_o.jpg

[goldchen96]

hi craygc and morback,
very nice photos....
cheers

[williams473]

I enjoy vignetting in some images because it reminds me that I'm looking at a photograph, and not a drawing or a painting. Used intelligently, I enjoy other techniques that remind me I'm looking at an imaghe on film - like printing the negative space around the frame, or printing the frame numbers, or vignetting.

[dcsang]

I thought Joe's question looked familiar . . . .
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53219&highlight=vignetting+shminetting

:D

Dave

[back alley]

nothing new under the sun...?

[john_s]

Interesting as I deliberately forced light fall off on to a few images I processed lately

Seems I got a little carried away with how many I did :eek:

I think the vignetting adds to each of these photos except for the last one in fog. To me it detracts from what fog is all about: the pervasive uniformness.

[OurManInTangier]

I've just been given the 35mm f1.8 Nikon DX lens by a colleague who just couldn't get on with the 'vignetting' effect of the optics. I've only had it one day and done some general snaps on my D3 ( the real reason for the effect.) Some shots its barely noticeable and on others it looks like the picture was shot on a Holga.

Either way its a handy, fast prime to have in the bag - especially when its free, so I'll be keeping it and banging out some of those funky/irritating photographs that have black corners.

As an aside, though more relevant to this thread than the rest of my post, I find vignetting to work on some photographs and not others. Like everything I suppose its about knowing your kit and using for the purpose you intend/require.

[Rafael]

I find vignetting to work on some photographs and not others. Like everything I suppose its about knowing your kit and using for the purpose you intend/require.

Perfectly put Simon. I could not agree more.

[MartinL]

Like any technique, vignetting should not be a distraction--should not call attention to itself--should not be the first thing that even an experienced photographer/critic notices. That's one reason I'm not a great fan of IR photos.

A possible test for this is whether the word "vignette" forms in your brain before your artistic/emotional response to the photo begins to develop. Another test is whether the vignette seems to be an artifact of the medium (the lens, in particular), or is it a self-conscious "artistic" application. In the first case, I OK with it; if I get a sense that it's technique at play, I resist.

Personally, landscape and wide-angle vignetting--especially sky--correspond to my peripheral vision experience: I perceive less light "on the edges, "and often it's a real-enough atmospheric effect.

I've thought about this some in regards to flare. Flare happens----whether with a camera lens or with my eyes. There's a point at which flare is an annoying error, but often it results from a "natural" confluence of environment and the medium.

[b.espahbod]

Vignetting brings all the attention to the centre of the picture and thats actually great for many applications. but when overdone it turns ugly like any other effect. I'm not as conservative as Martin but his opinions are correct. In my line of work as an industrial and commercial photographer vignetting is perceived as an effect to draw attention to certain subjects for example in car photography. but when it comes to pure photography (as art form) i think i will vote to conservatives and specially f/64 line of thinking and try to capture reality at its perfect shape that exists beyond the camera and not some nostalgic mechanical faults.

[Warren T.]

While I don't use the technique very often, I don't have a problem with using vignetting as a technique.

It's interesting that this subject has been brought up because I've been thinking about it lately. i've been following the gallery of an acquaintance who, in my opinion, overuses vignetting as a technique. It's to the point where it is the first thing that I notice about her pictures. I assume that it's an personal choice for her to incorporate this look to her photos, but for me, it's definitely distracts from my viewing experience on her pictures.

--Warren

[MartinL]

When I look at a photo, I expect artifice, I expect to be fooled. I just don't want to be aware of it. Great auto photography (for example) is when I say, "great car!" not, "great photo." So, of course, you'd apply all your craft to achieve your end. Done well, it's where art and the marketplace intersect, and I'm in awe of photographers who achieve that combination.

[helenhill]

Lovely Thread idea - Joe

I happen to love it..... when it works...Adds Atmosphere & Charm
thats why I recently got a 21/3.4 SA

This was shot at Coney Island this past Summer / Neopan1600 -M4
can't remember which lens though, don't seem to have it tagged
BUT for me it works for this shot

Cheers-H

[MartinL]

Lovely Thread idea - Joe

I happen to love it..... when it works...Adds Atmosphere & Charm
thats why I recently got a 21/3.4 SA

This was shot at Coney Island this past Summer / Neopan1600
can't remember which lens though, don't seem to have it tagged
BUT for me it works for this shot

Cheers-H
What accounts for the left side vignetting, but not the right?

[helenhill]

What accounts for the left side vignetting, but not the right?

Don't know :eek:
it was all rather unintentional...but a Nice Surprise :)
NO PP either

Best-H

[craygc]

I think the vignetting adds to each of these photos except for the last one in fog. To me it detracts from what fog is all about: the pervasive uniformness.

Thanks John,

Just also to add on the "fog" one... thats not fog! The Pearl River Delta is at the centre of Chinese manufacturing. The province of Guangdong (behind Hong Kong) supports 10 of thousands of factories and the Pearl River is the path by which all this stuff comes to the world. The smog and pollution in this area is horrific and that is what soups up the air in that shot :D

[noimmunity]

Hey Joe, the ZM C Biogon 35/2.8 has a touch of vignetting wide open that I found very pleasing.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3146/2783063351_84fb28e152.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3209/2783916728_235b843b9c.jpg