Apple explains purple flare issue affecting camera on iPhone 5 and other ph


Recommended Posts

sorry but my Galaxy s 2 does't do that at all. this is iPhone 5 hardware problem not software. so Apple have no fix for the problem believe me .

Here is a quick picture i took with my S2, not as much as some pictures I have seen but there is clearly purple in it.

http://i.imgur.com/2oeou.jpg

The thing is on the iPhone 5 it happens on all light sources, and while you can get a flare on every camera, the iPhone 5 has a huge range of effect where's most others have much smaller ranges, and can perfectly fine take pictures with light sources and even the sun in angles the iPhone 5 can't without the purple haze.

Also it's not simply about a flare. It's a flare plus the purple haze, if it had been just a flare it wouldn't have been an issue

Exactly. We're talking about shots where they take the same picture on different phones - including the iPhone 4S - and it is only the iPhone 5 that is affected. I've never come across this on any phone I've owned yet users of the iPhone 5 started noticing the purple flare immediately, which is interesting after Apple touted how the camera was improved.

You're right, there's a purple haze when I take a picture with my living room light just out of the frame, and that's not really that bright.

Can't think of a time I'd ever need to take such a photo though so I guess I'll live with it :p

Some people have speculated it's the Sapphire coating on the lens cover.

It's not about specifically taking those photos or videos, but rather lights occurring like that when you take pictures, which happens a lot more than you think.

I don't think it's really a reason to avoid the iPhone 5 for those in the eco system, but for those not, it would be a reason to avoid it, and for those who want a good camera, it's a good reason to chose another, but then the iphone 5 camera isn't that great to start with compared to other good camera phones, so it wouldn't be at the top on those lists anyway.

I had it do it to me on multiple occasions.. BUT.. The weirdest problem I have seen was it did it on a video I recorded while at the local JV football game Thursday night.

In the right hand bottom of the screen, about at the fence post you can see some weird fragment moving around.. It wasn't an any photo I took or other videos I have done. I assume it was because of the way the lights were angling off the camera

I'm not trying to defend Apple in any way as I own an iPhone 4S but before you Apple haters trash them with your comments, why don't you try to replicate the issue on your phones? Whether is an Android, iPhone or your precious, perfect Nokia Windows phone and see if it happens?

I personally have never seen that effect as I have not tried it but why don't you haters try it on your phones and see if you come up with the same results and let us know.

apple's new slogan should be: "Apple...no matter how you hold it, it still isn't right"....ok, just kidding, but that sure does seem to be a trend

I'm interested to know what causes the color purple to be predominate. I found this image from a CCTV camera, and it has a pinkish/reddish haze.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CCTV_Lens_flare.jpg

Apple is so full of it.

Really? From now on, we shall refer to you as Neowin's resident lens flare expert.

I took these photos with the iPhone 4S. Its camera is pretty amazing for a phone. I used HDR Effect on the Instagram application. Click on the photos to see larger, original shot.

adzdNSsQ.jpg adtGTI8h.jpg adranaVK.jpg abbEUo40.jpg

Gosh! Have we really gone this far? So far that we all believed that the "it just works" mentality has entitled us to just complain about any thing, and blame this on a design defect?

The simple fact that people are complaining about lens flares and chromatic aberrations just shows how much they absolutely do not know how lens, light, refractions and other high-school physics work. They probably were sleeping in class, or just simply erased those teachings from their memory because they classified this as "Why am I learning this, it will not be useful to me in real life".

What's next? Are they going to complain that we cannot use the phone under water, and that we cannot make phone calls because the battery is dead?

Lens flares, chromatic aberrations, etc., are as old as lenses and cameras. That means centuries. Why do you think photographers use polarised filters, take multiple shots, and use a plethora of accessories when working with intense light source? For the fun of it, perhaps?

Cameras use many lenses. Light trapped between lens components, the coating of the lenses, the materials use to fabricate the lenses, can all create aberrations in the output. And this holds true for cheap cameras to very expensive ones.

Look at this NASA-taken picture. Tell me what you see at the top of the picture. Right? (Purple) lens flare! If it can happen on a picture taken by a camera used by NASA, why could it not happen on an iPhone or any other cameras for that matter?

SED_wall_800x600.jpg

Gosh! Have we really gone this far? So far that we all believed that the "it just works" mentality has entitled us to just complain about any thing, and blame this on a design defect?

The simple fact that people are complain about lens flares and chromatic aberrations just shows how much they absolutely do not know how lens, light, refractions and other high-school physics work. They probably were sleeping in class, or just simply erased those teachings from their memory because they classified this as "Why am I learning this, it will not be useful to me in real life".

What's next? Are they going to complain that we cannot use the phone under water, and that we cannot make phone calls because the battery is dead?

Lens flares, chromatic aberrations, etc., are as old as lenses and cameras. That means centuries. Why do you think photographs use polarised filters, take multiple shots, and use the plethora of accessories when working with intense light source? For the fun of it, perhaps?

Cameras use many lenses. Light trapped between lens components, the coating of the lenses, the materials use to fabricate the lenses, can all create aberrations in the output. And this holds true for cheap cameras to very expensive ones.

Look at this NASA-taken picture. Tell me what you see at the top of the picture. Right? (Purple) lens flare! If it can happen on a picture taken by a camera used by NASA, why could it not happen on an iPhone or any other cameras for that matter?

SED_wall_800x600.jpg

Well said! (Y)

Any camera can and will do this. I don't think it's up for debate.

BUT - we were trying this out on different phones at work when the sun was reflecting off another building. The new iPhone does it a LOT more and a LOT easier to replicate than any of our other cameraphones.

Is it a big deal? No not really. Can easily be solved by changing the exposure levels set as default in the camera app, which will probably be silently done via upgrade.

It's dark here now, but I`m gonna take a few photos with my phone tomorrow and purposely try to get a purple lens flare

Pretty sure I have taken photos directly at the sun to see how they turned out and not ended up with a purple anything on them, just dark with a bright spot where the sun is, but I`ll have a go tomorrow

Forget that test. How about trying to get rid of the orange/red tint bang in the middle of photos taken with a lumia (800?)

I don't think the issue is that it can happen on other phones/cameras. Any one with a inkling of knowledge of photography knows it happens.

What the issue seems to be is that it happens a lot more with the iPhone than any other smartphone and a tweak to the software could probably cure it more often than not.

Myself and a friend have tried this out me using a Desire HD and him using the iPhone 5 and i have to say, although i could replicate the purple flare, it did take a lot more work where as the iPhone done it more often than not.

Forget that test. How about trying to get rid of the orange/red tint bang in the middle of photos taken with a lumia (800?)

wow that sucks, I have the 710 and it doesn't suffer from any red/orange tint

jVLtO.jpg

I don't think the issue is that it can happen on other phones/cameras. Any one with a inkling of knowledge of photography knows it happens.

What the issue seems to be is that it happens a lot more with the iPhone than any other smartphone and a tweak to the software could probably cure it more often than not.

Myself and a friend have tried this out me using a Desire HD and him using the iPhone 5 and i have to say, although i could replicate the purple flare, it did take a lot more work where as the iPhone done it more often than not.

I suspect it has something to do with the iPhone 5 being thinner. I assume they had to modify the lens in someway that made it shorter and more susceptible to lens flare.

That said, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that 99.9% of photos suffering from this are terrible, anyway, and the ones that weren't will look fine with it.

Forget that test. How about trying to get rid of the orange/red tint bang in the middle of photos taken with a lumia (800?)

http://www.flickr.com/groups/lumia800photo/pool/

I looked over quite a few of them, but can't find any red tint.

http://www.flickr.co...a800photo/pool/

I looked over quite a few of them, but can't find any red tint.

Apparently it only happens with indoor shots under incandescent lighting, but you can still make it out here...

http://www.flickr.co...-lumia800photo/

http://imageshack.us...68/wp000434.jpg

The second one is a shot of my own. Wasn't intended to be a great photo, just a quick snap, showing a friend something.

Look at this NASA-taken picture. Tell me what you see at the top of the picture. Right? (Purple) lens flare! If it can happen on a picture taken by a camera used by NASA, why could it not happen on an iPhone or any other cameras for that matter?

Because mindlessly jumping on the "Apple sucks" bandwagon in order to score cheap approval points of others is important to some.

That said, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that 99.9% of photos suffering from this are terrible, anyway, and the ones that weren't will look fine with it.

I'd reckon you're right ;)

Gosh! Have we really gone this far? So far that we all believed that the "it just works" mentality has entitled us to just complain about any thing, and blame this on a design defect?

The simple fact that people are complaining about lens flares and chromatic aberrations just shows how much they absolutely do not know how lens, light, refractions and other high-school physics work. They probably were sleeping in class, or just simply erased those teachings from their memory because they classified this as "Why am I learning this, it will not be useful to me in real life".

What's next? Are they going to complain that we cannot use the phone under water, and that we cannot make phone calls because the battery is dead?

Lens flares, chromatic aberrations, etc., are as old as lenses and cameras. That means centuries. Why do you think photographers use polarised filters, take multiple shots, and use a plethora of accessories when working with intense light source? For the fun of it, perhaps?

Cameras use many lenses. Light trapped between lens components, the coating of the lenses, the materials use to fabricate the lenses, can all create aberrations in the output. And this holds true for cheap cameras to very expensive ones.

Look at this NASA-taken picture. Tell me what you see at the top of the picture. Right? (Purple) lens flare! If it can happen on a picture taken by a camera used by NASA, why could it not happen on an iPhone or any other cameras for that matter?

SED_wall_800x600.jpg

Are you seriously comparing a NASA camera, which probably has a massive lens aperture and sensor to accomodate a far wider scope, to the iPhone? And justifying the purple effect on the iPhone? This NASA camera can probably still capture the sun in the other hemisphere while it's setting in one. Jesus probably used the iPhone 5 to capture the Big Bang?

Funny, the only likes you've got on your post are from the well known iToots, who'll toot their horn no matter what.

Is that... Jesus?

Yeah I was gonna ask him what he was doing in my kitchen but I was too nervous.

But yeah I was trying to show it is possible to do it on any camera. :rofl:

While I've never experienced this problem on any of my iPhones up to & including the 4S or any of my android phones, it seems odd to me that every time apple have a problem with their devices, their response is often, "all phones do it, so shut up"

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I think there will be a 27H1 for actual users of 26H1 The 25h2 supports ARM too : Snapdragon X, Snapdragon X Plus and Snapdragon X Elite
    • Poll: Grand Theft Auto VI price predictions, cast your vote by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe After years of waiting, Rockstar will be solidifying the launch date of Grand Theft Auto VI with the launch of pre-orders next week. While the studio has confirmed a date for this occasion, it is yet to attach a price to the highly anticipated game. So let's see what our readers think it will cost at launch. The Grand Theft Auto VI pre-orders will kick off on June 25 for digital and physical editions. Unless some last-minute changes happen, the release date will be November 19, 2026, across Xbox Series X|S and PlayStation 5. Unfortunately, there's still no information about a PC version from the developer or the publisher Take-Two. Now the question becomes, how much will Grand Theft Auto VI cost at launch? The game is predicted by some analysts to be the biggest launch of an entertainment product ever. With the amount of hype that has been built behind it and with ballooning development costs, Take-Two may price this Grand Theft Auto entry differently from other AAA titles. The current price of a AAA game is $69.99. That norm almost rose to $79.99 before calming down. But with such a massive release, Grand Theft Auto VI may be the game that pushes the boundary again. It's also possible that Take-Two keeps the price relatively low to increase the number of players that jump in early and keep them hooked on Grand Theft Auto Online to spend on microtransactions for years to come. Keep in mind that the below poll is asking for a prediction of the standard edition price, not a deluxe or any other special edition that Take-Two will introduce for additional benefits. Also, there is also the chance of the company splitting up the campaign and online portions. If you think that will happen, put your vote on what you think will be the total cost of the two. Poll Poll: How much will Grand Theft Auto VI cost? $59.99 $69.99 $79.99 $89.99 $100 or more Submit Vote If you have a very specific prediction in mind, sound off in the comments below.
    • Would you please fix your graphics. They are outdated and don't fit the article.
    • The Light of Life? We actually do glow till our Death, study finds by Sayan Sen Image by Rafael Rendon via Pexels A study by researchers at the University of Calgary has found that living organisms produce an extremely faint light known as ultraweak photon emission, and that this glow appears to drop significantly after death. The research was published in the Journal of Physical Chemistry in April 2025 and quickly drew widespread attention, leading to more than 200 news stories about the findings. Ultraweak photon emission (or UPE), sometimes called biophoton emission, refers to tiny amounts of light released by living cells as a result of normal biological activity. A photon is the basic particle of light, and researchers say every living system examined so far, including plants and animals, has been found to emit these photons. The glow is far too faint to be seen by the human eye. “I suppose it has a little to do with people being reminded of auras,” says Dr. Christoph Simon, PhD, one of the authors of the study and a professor in the Department of Physics and Astronomy in the Faculty of Science. “It is a fact that living beings glow. It’s a very weak glow, but it’s there and visible with very sensitive cameras.” According to the study, the light involved is extremely weak, ranging from 10 to 1,000 photons per square centimetre per second across a spectral range of 200 to 1,000 nanometres. For comparison, a nanometre is one-billionth of a metre and is commonly used to measure wavelengths of light. Detecting emissions at such low levels requires highly specialized equipment. To study the phenomenon, researchers used electron-multiplying charge-coupled device (EMCCD) and charge-coupled device (CCD) cameras. These imaging systems are designed to detect extremely small amounts of light, including individual photons, while minimizing background noise. The technology allowed researchers to capture signals that would otherwise be impossible to observe. The team worked with the Human Health Therapeutics Research Centre at the National Research Council of Canada (NRC) in Ottawa to examine photon emissions in mice. Researchers took two-hour exposure images of the animals before and after death and compared the results. “We saw that the level of light that they emit – this biophoton glow – is distinctly different between living and dead animals,” says Dr. Daniel Oblak, PhD, an associate professor in Physics and Astronomy and the corresponding author of the study. The images showed a clear decrease in photon emissions after death across the entire body of each mouse. According to the researchers, this provided direct evidence that living and dead tissue produce different levels of ultraweak photon emission. “It’s a very small amount and it’s, of course, very tricky to detect,” Oblak says. The study grew out of discussions between Simon, whose research interests include quantum biology, and Oblak, whose work focuses on detecting light for quantum communication experiments. Quantum biology is a field that explores whether processes described by quantum physics, which studies matter and energy at very small scales, may also play a role in living systems. “Since I work as a quantum physicist on light detection for quantum communication, I thought that experimentally we have a lot of the tools to be able to detect the light,” Oblak explains. The researchers also investigated UPE in plants and found that the light changed in response to stress. When plants were exposed to higher temperatures or physically injured, their photon emissions increased. Chemical treatments also affected the glow. Among the substances tested, the local anesthetic benzocaine produced the strongest emission response when applied to injured plant tissue. These findings suggest that ultraweak photon emission is closely linked to biochemical and metabolic activity inside living organisms. Metabolism refers to the chemical reactions that allow cells and organisms to stay alive and function. Because these reactions change when an organism experiences stress, injury or disease, researchers believe UPE may provide a way to monitor those changes. The researchers stress that the glow is a physical and biological phenomenon, not a metaphysical one. Oblak says more research is needed to understand exactly how the light is produced and what information it may reveal about the condition of living tissue. “We must understand what that is to figure out what’s happening,” he says. “If we can understand how that relates to certain influences on the body – stress, diseases – then that could be used as a diagnostic tool.” The researchers believe the technique could eventually help scientists study health and disease without invasive procedures. Because UPE can be measured without adding dyes, markers or labels, it may offer a way to monitor whether tissue is healthy, damaged or alive. In plants, it could help researchers better understand how organisms respond to injury, heat and other forms of stress. While the work is still in its early stages, the study demonstrates that ultraweak photon emission imaging can provide a non-invasive and label-free way to observe biological activity. Researchers say the approach could become a useful tool for studying vitality, stress responses and other important processes in both animals and plants. Source: University of Calgary, ACS publication This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      hhgygy earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Month Later
      AMV earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      AMV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Collaborator
      ryansurfer98 went up a rank
      Collaborator
    • One Month Later
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      513
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      171
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      82
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      74
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!