this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2024
20 points (100.0% liked)
Ask UK
1228 readers
25 users here now
Community for asking and answering any question related to the life, the people or anything related to the UK.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Any first person game that has lens flare.
Eyes dont have lens flare. Cameras do. Cinematic cutscenes, thats fine. 3rd person cameras, thats fine - if it isnt over done. Hell, even some super bright thing in first person, where lens flare is used as a cinematic effect to show it is seriously fucking bright, that can be fine.
But generally speaking, lens flare is overused in video games. Pretty sure it was BF3 that took it from "huh, we can do lens flare" to "lens flare indiscriminatly"
I was going to say lens flare in films. You can always tell what stage someone is at when learning Photoshop as they still love using the filter and, to my mind, it just reeks of amateur hour when used in films and TV shows.
I can understand it in film CGI and sets/post, as its hard to avoid when actually outside.
Lens flare is a product of multiple lenses and the aperture. And most of the time shots are set up to reduce it (more expensive lenses, matt boxes etc).
When overcooked in a movie it ends up looking amateur AF. Either the shot wasnt set up correctly, or someone has over-egged it in post-production.
I have rarely seen a pronounced lens flare that makes sense in a movie.
The classic is a sci-fi movie - the spaceship turns up at a new planet and you get a sweeping view with lens flares obscuring the carefully modelled view.
Welcome to JJ Abrams Star Trek. 😆
Me, with astigmatism: I'm gonna have to disagree on that one.