Removing Sun Halos

[Archbob]

I don't mean lens flares, I can generally take care of them , but I've been trying to remove the halo effect around the sun in sunset/sunrise photos and its really hard. Check out these 2 pics:





I've tried selecting and filling with content aware on normal and dissolve.
Heal doesn't work either.

Anyone got an tips or ideas of how to remove the halos around the sun or make the color blend in more seemlessly?

Can't find a Youtube tutorial for this either.

 

[kerby]

I think I understand what you're asking--

What I would do is use the eyedropper tool to take the dark purple/blue color and also the orange/yellow color in the sky. Then I would use the gradient tool over the sky to get an even color across the horizon. I would then use a mask on the gradient layer over top of the image and only mask the parts you want to show through. Here's a quick walkthrough example with your first photo:

Here's the colors I picked from the sky.


...and here's the gradient layers from those colors.


Next, I masked the landscape out. This is the mask layer with no layer mode applied.


Set layer mode to hard light and erased some of the parts around the sun and orange light for the finished image.


Original for comparison:



I know it's not entirely "honest" to the photograph, but it should effectively blend the horizon colors better. I hope I understood your query enough to help. Good luck!

 

[Archbob]

Thanks, is there a youtube tutorial for this sun halos thing? I've looked everywhere.
I'll try it.

Also when taking the photo, would using a polarizer filter help?

 

[Tom Mann]

...Also when taking the photo, would using a polarizer filter help?

No, it won't help. The direct light coming from that part of the sky is only very weakly polarized. This is in contrast to the strong polarization effect one gets when looking at 90 degrees to the direction of the sun in a clear sky.

However, what would help is using the techniques of High Dynamic Range (aka, HDR) photography. In this technique, one takes multiple images of the scene over a very wide range of exposures and blends all the images together. If done correctly, this will reduce the problem you see. Also, capturing the images as RAW files, not JPGs, and maintaining 16 bit per channel bit depth all the way through processing will help enormously with posterization issues. You should convert to 8 bpc JPGs only as the very last step in the process.

Tom M

 

[Archbob]

I have the raw files and its actually what I am editing to get those files. The problem becomes more of an issue since I am turning up the vibrance/saturation in lightroom to get the colors I want. I'm trying then to reduce the halo in photoshop.

 

[Tom Mann]

1. What exactly do u mean by "reduce them"? Reduce their size their intensity, or something else?

2. It's good u are using raw files, but Are u using HDR techniques?

3. Are u maintaining 16 bpc throughout your entire processing?

T

 

[Archbob]

Usually reduce their intensity and have the light more integrate seemlessly so there's not an apparent ring around the sun when you step back and look.

 

[Tom Mann]

What about my questions #2 and #3?

Tom M

 

[Archbob]

2. No, not sure this photo, I sometimes shoot in HDR, but that has its own issues

3. Not really sure how to check this, usually editing in lightroom just means going to the "develop" panel and adjust the various sliders.

 

[Tom Mann]

OK. Now I have a better idea where you are coming from.

WRT #2, there are lots and lots of algorithms and options to explore in HDR. I do think it would be a long term solution for this problem, at least if done correctly.

WRT #3, if you are staying in LR, then all processing is done at 16 bpc in its wide gamut, ProFoto-like space, so no problem there.

Have you tried simply using a radial blur filter (in PS, not LR), centered on the sun, and masked to only include the sky? Below is a quick and dirty example of this approach. Obviously, it doesn't work if there are clouds in the sky, but it might be a fix for some of your images. It also has the side benefit of hiding all the dried water drops, dirt, etc. on your sensor, LOL.

Tom M

PS - Have you checked to see if the halo is caused by atmospheric optics, some isotropic scattering in your lens (ie, NOT the diaphragm), or by processing? One way to do this is to take the same shot with different lenses and different bodies. Of course, whatever physical effect is the root cause, it will always be exaggerated if you increase color or tonal contrast in the image.

 

[Tom Mann]

PPS - FYI, here's an exaggerated view of the sensor spots. To be honest, I would be much more concerned about this than about the halo because most people will just think the halo is part of the scene, whereas most viewers know that these spots are caused by something under your control.

T

 

[Archbob]

Been trying to clean the sensor forever with the sensor cleaning kit, when I get rid of old stains, new ones just appear.

What tool did you use the bring that out? Looks like a sharpen image function

The halo effect is there, but it is intensified by my editing. Thanks, the radial gradient in LR and PS does help alot. I don't think I can really completely get rid of it.

 

[IamSam]

Not sure if this is what your looking for, but here's another possibility.

This is a combination of a Selective color adjustment layer to reduce the halo and a Curves adjustment layer.

On the Selective Color adjustment layer, I set the Cyan in the Yellows to -26. I also added some masking on the horizon to preserve the original coloring.
I then used a Curves adjustment layer to to raise the Blues.
I slightly raised the RGB of the the Curves adjustment to brighten the overall image.

The colors changed slightly, but it's marginal. This is a screenshot and I did not repair the banding.

 

[Archbob]

Hmm, I'll try that too, it looks like the result if I use the radial gradient in Lightroom. I think Tommann's Result with the radial gradient in PS is the best still. His method works well because the Halo usually doesn't matter if there are clouds in the sky because they block out the halo usually anyways. Its only on a clear day that this usually matters.

 

[Tom Mann]

Various points:

1. The method I used to make the locations of the senior dirt spots more visible was to simply max out the clarity slider. I did it in ACR, but it would have worked just as well in LR.

2. I'm sorry to hear that your sensor cleaning attempts have not worked well. There are some important tricks to cleaning one's sensor without leaving new residue or smearing around the old dirt. If you would like to discuss this, we could start a new thread on the subject.

3. In posts #12 and #14, it seems like you think that I used the radial gradient tool. I didn't: As I said in post #10, I used a radial blur.

4. I *really* like Sam's approach. In fact, I was debating using an approach similar to that myself vs the radial blur approach. Now that I see what he was able to do, I'm convinced that, by far, the best approach would be to use a combination of the two approaches -- first targeted adjustments of a particular color and brightness range (like Sam did), followed by a radial blur (like I did).

5. You never responded to my questions about whether you think that halos like this one are caused by atmospheric phenomena, isotropic scattering in your lens (not diffraction from a small aperture which is anisotropic), or something in your camera (eg, small amounts of spill of light between sensor elements in different areas of your sensor caused by light bouncing off of dirt on the surface of your sensor). I would be really interested to know if you have done anything to understand the root cause of this phenomena. Other than with crappy consumer lenses, the only time I have seen anything like this in my real kit was on an old, but highly regarded piece of pro glass, a 90's era Nikon 28-70 f/2.8 AFD. I don't see it on its successor, the nanocrystaline coated 24-70 f/2.8 AFS.

Cheers,

Tom M

 

[Archbob]

1. I actually used the spot detection feature in LR to see where the dust was

2. I may start a new thread on this, I have been trying to clean the sensor with the kit for months

3. I'm aware you used the gradient blur, I eventually use it as well to further my results

5. I'm using the Kit lens from the Cannon T2i so some of it may be lens flare, but not nearly all of it.. I really think that the kit lens from the T2i just isn't very good at gradually pecking out color differences and hues. But the original photo's ring wasn't as apparent as the ring after I edited. A lot of it was because I tuned up the vibrance, reds, and saturation. When I get the 5D MKIII (or possibly 5D Mark IV, if it every comes out), It may not be as big of a problem.

 

[Tom Mann]

#3 - Not to belabor this point, but just to be sure we are talking about the same thing, I used the radial blur filter. As far as I know, there is no tool in PS named, "gradient blur", although using the lens blur filter with an appropriate blur map would also work quite nicely and could be thought of as a gradient blur.

#5 - Yes, as I said in a previous post, increasing the vibrance, saturation, local or global contrast, or any processing of that sort will, *of course*, bring out image imperfections like this halo, but these are necessary artistic modifications to the image that clearly are not the root cause of the problem -- they are just making an existing problem more visible, so if you want vibrant colors, you've got to fix the root cause.

Personally, I think that the use of a kit lens plus the dirt on your sensor could easily be major contributors to this problem. As I said earlier, a few seconds of your time (eg, swapping lenses - borrow or rent one if you don't have another lens) would let you know almost immediately if the lens is a major factor and guide you as to whether you should spend your money on a new body or use the same or less money to buy a good lens or two. I would also add that shooting into the sun is one of the most demanding tasks a lens can face. If you do a lot of shooting-directly-into-the-sun shots like this one, you may want to seriously consider a couple of modern, fixed FL lenses instead of another zoom. Generally, fixed FL lenses are vastly less prone to this sort of problem.

Cheers,

Tom M

 

[Archbob]

3. Sorry, I mean Radial Blur.

5. Unfortunately I don't have that many friend that have better lenses for Crop-sensor DSLR's and many of them shoot Nikkon which aren't compatible with my Cannon. I don't think its the dirt on the Lens, I really think that the Kit Lens just isn't that good for this. Don't have money to get a new Camera or Lens yet.

I'm trying to save for a Better Body(MKIII) and an astro lens first(Rokinon Lenses) because Noise is seriously destroying my night time shots and that is much harder to edit for me than this. I think even the kit Lens for the MKIII is far superior to the kit lens for the T2i as it is far more expensive.

 

[Tom Mann]

I certainly understand, but even a lowly 50/1.8 prime stopped down to f/8 would almost certainly be much better at this sort of sun-in-your-face photography than your current kit lens. Primes have many fewer elements than zooms, so there are fewer surfaces for the light to scatter from, and fewer surfaces to bounce off of, thereby almost always generating less veiling flare (more or less what you have), as well as the discrete artifacts most people think of as flare than a zoom at the same FL and f/number.

Almost everyone owns a 50 mm prime of some vintage, so you might be able to find one to borrow, and it is available for purchase almost everywhere, both new for around $100, and used for around half of that, even in small college towns, LOL.

Besides, a lens like that would also be absolutely perfect for your low light photography. Don't worry that it's for full frame cameras - it should also work on your crop sensor body. Yes, it will act like a mild telephoto on crop frame cameras, but you will only be using the center of the image, so the image quality will be even higher than the reviews (which are done on a FF body) suggest. In addition, once you get your full frame body, it will still be useful.

Anyway, the best of luck in your photography.

Tom M