1. What do you think of the bokeh here?

roentarre · 08-28-2008, 08:27 PM

Let's run a survey about how you perceive this bokeh by forum members

Bokeh is from A 50mm f1.2 on k20d

The background is chosen as they are not far away from the subject flower in terms of distance. The elements in the bokeh are not usually that pleasant: branches, bricks and dark foliage.

f1.2 can blurr out these elements effectively and it is quite interesting to see how others interpret the bokeh department.

No highlight or metallic surface bokeh are tested here.

Last edited by roentarre; 08-28-2008 at 08:33 PM.

jsherman999 · 08-28-2008, 08:31 PM

Utterly love it. That's the sort of bokeh I love - impressionistic, but not 'nervous'.

Really, really nice shot.

None of your choices in the poll are very good!! How about adding a choice:

o . Perfect!

.

audiobomber · 08-28-2008, 08:31 PM

A bit too busy for me. The background competes with the subject.

roentarre · 08-28-2008, 08:37 PM

Originally posted by jsherman999

Utterly love it. That's the sort of bokeh I love - impressionistic, but not 'nervous'.

Really, really nice shot.

None of your choices in the poll are very good!! How about adding a choice:

o . Perfect!

.

Interesting to see your response and thank you for the compliment. From your conversation with kelly, I can tell that this is your style of bokeh. Quite surprising to see such a quick response.

Again, everyone says the bokeh is subject to interpretation and we will see how people interpret this.

I am looking at the bokeh here with the typcial criticism offered at various fora.

Originally posted by audiobomber

A bit too busy for me. The background competes with the subject.

Yes, this tells me that you are one of the classic photographer who loves clean, simple background blurring. A more traditional film photographer perspective.

Thank you for such a quick response

jsherman999 · 08-28-2008, 08:52 PM

.

I just think the image as a whole is wonderful. Most images can be seen as simple, traditional 1) foreground, 2) background, and in this one, the bokeh bleeds into the foreground, while the main 'subject' retains enough sharpness to be identifiable as the 'subject'. But the whole image is the 'subject' here - the bokeh has an individuality that makes it as important as what's in the foreground.

Good lens + good photographer.

.

clawhammer · 08-28-2008, 08:52 PM

I love the way the flower itself looks, but the background seems to distract from the flower, especially that branch in the top right. Crop it so that branch is gone, and it has the feel of being more of a painting than a photograph.

PS: was that branch in front of the flower?

Damn Brit · 08-28-2008, 09:07 PM

It's the lens Van Gogh would have had on his camera when he cut his ear off.

ryan s · 08-28-2008, 09:09 PM

Looks just fine for a 50mm lens at f/1.2, with a close background

Peter Zack · 08-28-2008, 09:17 PM

Put me down on the film side. I never really thought of it that way 20+ years of mostly slide film and only a few with a DSLR. But I'll qualify the comment by saying that the branch clawhammer mentioned is what caught my eye as well. Otherwise I quite like the background. I voted the first choice.

roentarre · 08-28-2008, 10:24 PM

Originally posted by jsherman999

.

I just think the image as a whole is wonderful. Most images can be seen as simple, traditional 1) foreground, 2) background, and in this one, the bokeh bleeds into the foreground, while the main 'subject' retains enough sharpness to be identifiable as the 'subject'.

.

Again, your view is a stark contrast to the majority of the viewers so far (9 voted the first option). This is interesting as we already see many posts in the forum regarding quality of bokeh. Most of the time, people are holding back their view about bokeh quality.

Most of the time, the standard for bokeh quality is quite high where it shall be effortless to identify the subject in a photograph.

Your view is quite clear and it is quite true that it onlytakes only a person to appreciate my intention in the photograph. Though I know it is a taboo to do so.

roentarre · 08-28-2008, 10:29 PM

Originally posted by ryan s

Looks just fine for a 50mm lens at f/1.2, with a close background

I know most 50mm are bad with this type of photograph even with A 50mm f1.2 which is not so forgiving with most cluttering background.

The shot is controversial because it takes time to identify the subject and most experienced photographers like Peter Zack spot the harsh branch like a fly on water melon.

Damn Brit · 08-28-2008, 10:46 PM

I also noticed the branch/stem straight away but it didn't bother me. I like that the shot is busy and that there are things in the picture that can only be identified by deduction.
It's a bit like solving a puzzle by logic. The one truly identifiable thing in the picture is the flower and using that as the key one can work out what the other elements might be but at the same time you cannot know precisely what they are.

philmorley · 08-29-2008, 12:28 AM

Originally posted by audiobomber

A bit too busy for me. The background competes with the subject.

i agree with you

ddhytz · 08-29-2008, 12:53 AM

Not the type of boken I like, honestly. Not smooth enough, maybe the background is too close to the subject flower.

Pentaxtic · 08-29-2008, 12:55 AM

I like it. You have to wince your eyes and appreciate the imagery. You can't look straight at it.

View Poll Results: 1. What do you think of bokeh here?
Harsh edges at times, distracting elements	51	72.86%
Soft and dreamy but low contrast	9	12.86%
Grainy with under-exposed noise	0	0%
Unsharp, soft and it needs to be stopped down to f8 at least	1	1.43%
Do you mean out of focus rendering?	3	4.29%
No ideas	6	8.57%
Voters: 70. You may not vote on this poll

08-28-2008, 08:27 PM	#1
roentarre Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 11,783	1. What do you think of the bokeh here? Let's run a survey about how you perceive this bokeh by forum members Bokeh is from A 50mm f1.2 on k20d The background is chosen as they are not far away from the subject flower in terms of distance. The elements in the bokeh are not usually that pleasant: branches, bricks and dark foliage. f1.2 can blurr out these elements effectively and it is quite interesting to see how others interpret the bokeh department. No highlight or metallic surface bokeh are tested here. Last edited by roentarre; 08-28-2008 at 08:33 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Bokina versus Bokeh Monster, which bokeh you prefer?	Pentaxor	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	04-21-2010 01:50 AM
Nature What Bokeh!	cwhans	Post Your Photos!	4	04-15-2010 09:38 AM
Bokeh..	bwield	Post Your Photos!	6	07-22-2008 04:56 PM
bokeh	lastdodobird	Post Your Photos!	1	02-29-2008 01:44 AM
Bokeh	Stratman	Post Your Photos!	8	05-30-2007 10:42 AM

08-28-2008, 08:31 PM	#2
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	Utterly love it. That's the sort of bokeh I love - impressionistic, but not 'nervous'. Really, really nice shot. None of your choices in the poll are very good!! How about adding a choice: o . Perfect! .

08-28-2008, 08:31 PM	#3
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	A bit too busy for me. The background competes with the subject.

08-28-2008, 08:37 PM	#4
roentarre Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 11,783 Original Poster	Originally posted by jsherman999 Utterly love it. That's the sort of bokeh I love - impressionistic, but not 'nervous'. Really, really nice shot. None of your choices in the poll are very good!! How about adding a choice: o . Perfect! . Interesting to see your response and thank you for the compliment. From your conversation with kelly, I can tell that this is your style of bokeh. Quite surprising to see such a quick response. Again, everyone says the bokeh is subject to interpretation and we will see how people interpret this. I am looking at the bokeh here with the typcial criticism offered at various fora. Originally posted by audiobomber A bit too busy for me. The background competes with the subject. Yes, this tells me that you are one of the classic photographer who loves clean, simple background blurring. A more traditional film photographer perspective. Thank you for such a quick response

08-28-2008, 08:52 PM	#5
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	. I just think the image as a whole is wonderful. Most images can be seen as simple, traditional 1) foreground, 2) background, and in this one, the bokeh bleeds into the foreground, while the main 'subject' retains enough sharpness to be identifiable as the 'subject'. But the whole image is the 'subject' here - the bokeh has an individuality that makes it as important as what's in the foreground. Good lens + good photographer. .

08-28-2008, 08:52 PM	#6
clawhammer Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Logan, Utah Photos: Gallery Posts: 971	I love the way the flower itself looks, but the background seems to distract from the flower, especially that branch in the top right. Crop it so that branch is gone, and it has the feel of being more of a painting than a photograph. PS: was that branch in front of the flower?

08-28-2008, 09:07 PM	#7
Damn Brit Guest	It's the lens Van Gogh would have had on his camera when he cut his ear off.

08-28-2008, 09:09 PM	#8
ryan s Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Madison, WI Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,383	Looks just fine for a 50mm lens at f/1.2, with a close background

08-28-2008, 09:17 PM	#9
Peter Zack Pentaxian Moderator Emeritus Join Date: May 2007 Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 10,643	Put me down on the film side. I never really thought of it that way 20+ years of mostly slide film and only a few with a DSLR. But I'll qualify the comment by saying that the branch clawhammer mentioned is what caught my eye as well. Otherwise I quite like the background. I voted the first choice.

08-28-2008, 10:24 PM	#10
roentarre Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 11,783 Original Poster	Originally posted by jsherman999 . I just think the image as a whole is wonderful. Most images can be seen as simple, traditional 1) foreground, 2) background, and in this one, the bokeh bleeds into the foreground, while the main 'subject' retains enough sharpness to be identifiable as the 'subject'. . Again, your view is a stark contrast to the majority of the viewers so far (9 voted the first option). This is interesting as we already see many posts in the forum regarding quality of bokeh. Most of the time, people are holding back their view about bokeh quality. Most of the time, the standard for bokeh quality is quite high where it shall be effortless to identify the subject in a photograph. Your view is quite clear and it is quite true that it onlytakes only a person to appreciate my intention in the photograph. Though I know it is a taboo to do so.

08-28-2008, 10:29 PM	#11
roentarre Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 11,783 Original Poster	Originally posted by ryan s Looks just fine for a 50mm lens at f/1.2, with a close background I know most 50mm are bad with this type of photograph even with A 50mm f1.2 which is not so forgiving with most cluttering background. The shot is controversial because it takes time to identify the subject and most experienced photographers like Peter Zack spot the harsh branch like a fly on water melon.

08-28-2008, 10:46 PM	#12
Damn Brit Guest	I also noticed the branch/stem straight away but it didn't bother me. I like that the shot is busy and that there are things in the picture that can only be identified by deduction. It's a bit like solving a puzzle by logic. The one truly identifiable thing in the picture is the flower and using that as the key one can work out what the other elements might be but at the same time you cannot know precisely what they are.

08-29-2008, 12:28 AM	#13
philmorley Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: in a house in Armidale, Australia Posts: 472	Originally posted by audiobomber A bit too busy for me. The background competes with the subject. i agree with you

08-29-2008, 12:53 AM	#14
ddhytz Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Melbourne Posts: 602	Not the type of boken I like, honestly. Not smooth enough, maybe the background is too close to the subject flower.

08-29-2008, 12:55 AM	#15
Pentaxtic Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Vancouver Photos: Gallery Posts: 417	I like it. You have to wince your eyes and appreciate the imagery. You can't look straight at it.