This is pretty much equivalent to a technique I used to see people use in Photoshop. I think it's gone out of style recently, but used to be common (IIRC):
* Import a photo as a layer
* Duplicate that layer
* Increase saturation in that layer and then blur it
* Mix that layer by some percent (20-50?) over the base photo
Gives a nice ethereal feel.
You used to see this all the time in photos. But, maybe it's out of fashion now that everyone knows how to do it :/
A similar effect was used in analogue photography by putting some stockings on top of the lens. IIRC it is called "flu effect", which seems to be, unfortunately, ungoogleable.
That’s because it was developed in the age of analog darkrooms (dodge, burn, etc.).
Even the name of the app was meant to help photographers transition.
It’s really amazing how completely digital photography has replaced film (not really surprising, though).
Film photography demanded a great deal of flexibility and adaptability from its practitioners; which, I suspect, is why they adapted to digital so well.
When I recoded my canvas library's filters functionality last year (because: make it more like SVG filters, which allow you to branch the data multiple times, apply various effects, then merge them back into the final output - which is awesome!) I made a decision to include an 'opacity' attribute to each effect so at the end of the effect calculation it can be recombined with the input before outputting to the next effect. This was whimsy on my part, but it does make creating effects like this one quite easy - as can be seen in the Gaussian blur's test demo: https://scrawl-v8.rikweb.org.uk/demo/filters-001.html
In the demo, `mix-blend-mode: normal` is used. This is the default, so this line of CSS isn’t required. You can get some interesting effects if you do use one of the other blend modes with the blurred layer.
This might not work so well if the layer was too dark or light. Best to average the layer lightness to mid grey using curves.
The reason: Everything in the Oberlay family is a contrast effect. The darks act to darken, the lights act to lighten. Hence an average of mid grey will be least intrusive.
This is different to the multiply family, which can only darken, or the screen family which can only lighten.
A bit off topic, but this remember me the effect used on the Coen brothers movie Inside Llewyn Davis, I love that movie, but the effect throw me off all the time and now is "the movie ruined with that effect" for me.
Ironically, the first image makes me think of a dreamy blur when it's in fact a dirty lens, but the author's image makes me think of a dirty lens when it's a calculated attempt at a blur.
I really do not like the effect, but alternatively buy a cheap IR filter and rub the Vaseline onto it instead. Far easier to clean and for more disposable.
Halation is what I call this silvery add-mix blur look. Might not be the accurate term but it's the one I've used since the early 1990s. In those days, when people wanted to make video look like film, the expression, "Add some halation to it," was sometimes used by the old school film/cinema guys.
* Import a photo as a layer
* Duplicate that layer
* Increase saturation in that layer and then blur it
* Mix that layer by some percent (20-50?) over the base photo
Gives a nice ethereal feel.
You used to see this all the time in photos. But, maybe it's out of fashion now that everyone knows how to do it :/