[cprobertson1]

AS someone who designed and built their own lens specifically for cool bokeh effects I have but one thing to say.......


HELP! MY BOKEY BALLS ARE SNOWFLAKES!!!

---

EDIT: Whoops, I wrote "bokey" instead of "bokeh". I'm running with it! They're called "bokey balls" from now on.

---------- Post added 2022-06-21 at 12:20 ----------

In a more constructive light, I would like to approach the subject of bokeh overuse from two angles.

Dilber's Law: Most of everything is terrible. Movies, music, beooks, art, photos... most of them are terrible. We get masterpieces because some are good - they survive literally due to survivorship bias. We remember the good ones because they are good - most of the rest... weren't good, and we forgot about them. It's the same with bokeh in photos. Most of them are bad. You'll remember the good ones...

It's a tool: you wouldn't hate nailguns becasue they are overused in production-carpentry... actually, Im willing to bet I can find a youtuber saying exactly that... but that's not the point - the point is that at the end of the day, people are using that tool because they find it to be effective. In the case of bokeh/bokey, the photographers clearly enjoy using the effect. Per Dilbert's law, above, most of them aren't going to use it to great effect... but some of them are. For the truly great bokeh users to make it work, they all need practice, so there are going to be a great deal of flops out there too... but for every sea of flops, there will always be some masterpieces floating in the top. There will even be future masterpiece makers floating towards the top too.

I for one love bokeh. I'm currently playing with some pictures I took in botanical gardens where the background consists of a waving sea of [pink flower] with my focal point being a single in-focus blossom. They were all the same colour, so depth of field was my sharpest tool to use to isolate the foreground. It's no masterpiece, but I like it. There are other shots in that same set where I have bokeh gravel (fun), bokeh cacti (way too noisey), and bokeh rain on a window (surprisingly nice). Most of them are terrible, but there are a few that I like.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that a lot of everything is terrible - instead of focusing on the out-of-focus, what I'd suggest is trying to learn how to quickly sift through sets and find the good ones so you aren't spending so much time sifting through the more cliched uses of bokeh. Learn to optimise your time looking at photos by quickly ignoring the ones you don't like - if theres a surge of bokeh photos just now, then chances are it's a fad and will pass - and if it's not a fad, then try to look forward to the masterpieces that will inevitably float to the top of the sea of mediocrity!

PS - for all who think you're "part of the sea of mediocrity" - don't worry, I'm right there with you. I'm havng fun swimming! Don't worry about it! If you weren't part of that sea, there'd be nothing for the masterpieces to float on... and that includes your own future masterpieces

---

Last edited by cprobertson1; 06-21-2022 at 12:13 PM.

[JohnMc]

Does this mean you'll be back to doing the hokey bokey soon?

[gofour3]

The thing is, we all like different amounts of pepper, don't we? If someone adds a pound of it to all their meals, it needn't necessarily betray an absence of skill... it could simply be that they really like pepper - and who are we to object? It's their palette... We don't have to eat their food. We can make our own meals with as much or as little pepper as we like.

Pepper is important and can taste nice. If you add a pound of pepper to all your meals it only shows the absence of skill. But the same could be said if you never ever tried pepper.

Reminds me of an old quote from a former Prime Minister of Canada and yes you can get a T-Shirt:

"Jean Chretien Pepper Quote" T-shirt by MacKaycartoons | Redbubble

"For me, pepper, I put it on my plate." November 25, 1997, at a press conference, in response to a question from Nardwuar the Human Serviette about whether Chrétien supported police use of pepper spray on protestors. Jean Chretien, Prime Minister of Canada.

Phil.

[169]

I was about to reply to 169's post too, but on second reading I believe it may have been satirical. At least, I hope it was...

Either way, I think we can all agree Jane Bown invented bokeh in 1950 with here photo of "Jean Cocteau (with Madeleine)" (third photo down)...

I am anti-Jane-Bown. She is another Olympusoid lizard person trying to force her so-called blurrification onto our minds where it is not wanted by us.
I am also anti-Cocteau, because his swimming videos are TERRIBLE with that little red hat and the funny high voice he sings in with words that aren't even WORDS.
And I am anti-satire: I say what I meant and saw what I said, which means I know what I like when I see it, and if you don't or, aren't, your wrong.

Basically, it all boils down to when it comes to Bokeh, that it all went bad when they stopped using pinholes and - started going good when cheap telephones made EVERYTHING go IN FOCUS ALL THE TIME OR THE PICTURE IS WRONG AND SHOULD OF BEEN DELETED! or thrown away.

[BigMackCam]

I am anti-Jane-Bown. She is another Olympusoid lizard person trying to force her so-called blurrification onto our minds where it is not wanted by us.
I am also anti-Cocteau, because his swimming videos are TERRIBLE with that little red hat and the funny high voice he sings in with words that aren't even WORDS.
And I am anti-satire: I say what I meant and saw what I said, which means I know what I like when I see it, and if you don't or, aren't, your wrong.

Basically, it all boils down to when it comes to Bokeh, that it all went bad when they stopped using pinholes and - started going good when cheap telephones made EVERYTHING go IN FOCUS ALL THE TIME OR THE PICTURE IS WRONG AND SHOULD OF BEEN DELETED! or thrown away.

Nurse! 25 mg Thorazine intra-muscular, followed by 50mg IV every four hours for the next 8 hours, please...

[169]

I am also anti-intra-muscular medication.
But seriously, why oh why cant they just leave a good thing alone and go back to the time when people was black and white and film was made of crystals and cameras was a box with tiny holes instead of these new fangled lenses with their inevitable in-built focal planes and blurs - I mean, that's were we where going wrong, isn't it? Surely thats obvious. I mean it's so obvious I'm just not going to say any more about that for a while and leave you lot too it.

Rant over.

[epb1976]

I'm new to photography so I'll keep it short. I love watching the wonderful chap from the Zenography YT channel, one of his macro pictures is a tiny model train, and the bokeh bubbles look like steam coming out. It's beautiful. That's it.

[GUB]

I am also anti-intra-muscular medication.
But seriously, why oh why cant they just leave a good thing alone and go back to the time when people was black and white and film was made of crystals and cameras was a box with tiny holes instead of these new fangled lenses with their inevitable in-built focal planes and blurs - I mean, that's were we where going wrong, isn't it? Surely thats obvious.

Thank the lord for varying views on everything in life. It would be an awfully boring place otherwise.
But to correct a point that your entire logic flow revolves around - The finest bokeh lenses are the older ones from the film days. Even the "kit" lens of the 60s (the Takumar 55 f2) have the potential to be better bokeh producers than modern glass.
Plenty of film lenses with the good specs - I would have more than 50 lined up on my shelves that are from the film days that I would reach for rather than any digital era lens. Lenses for the purpose producing a characterful image not just obsessing on sharpness.

[ebworthen]

Indubitably, unequivocally yes as far as I'm concerned and I'll happily explain why.

I've been taking photos for 50+ years and this (to me) incredibly annoying phenomenon has only been a thing for the last few years, especially since the new generation of Instagram/Lomography fans decided that buying cheap nasty plastic cameras, or spending 50 of whatever your local currency is on a prime lens for a £$€1000+ camera body were good ideas.

Now I wouldn't especially argue with the second one since it helps with the budget and gives new life to old otherwise redundant kit, but please e don't think you need an excuse to do it.

So that's the annoyance factor, exacerbated by an onslaught of social media postings on the subject.

The second factor is also about annoyance... According to traditional photographic wisdom, background - especially out of focus - features in one of two ways; either not at all (as in fill the frame with your subject), or as a contrast to an isolated subject sitting, for example, on a rule of thirds intersection, in which case the background should not be distracting.

It's my experience that people all too frequently go out of their way to feature a background that's (1) overwhelmingly disproportionately large, and (2) full of these dreadful, annoying and distracting 'bokeh balls' cos they're a thing innit.

Seriously people, unless your specialism is night-time urban photography, or recording winsome waifs in dappled woodland settings then please give it a rest. I for one couldn't care less about your balls. Indeed I would say that anyone trumpeting "look at the bokeh in my photo!" is as likely as not to be taking substandard photos with poorly considered composition. An out of focus background (to give it it's proper English description) has it's time, place and function but these days it's vastly overused and misunderstood in my opinion.

Rant over.

Thwyllo said: "...recording winsome waifs in dappled woodland settings..."

LOL!

I feel your pain.

Reminds me of lens flare for the sake of lens flare.

Bokeh does simulate that feeling we have when we focus our vision and attention on something to the exclusion of what else we might be able to see.

It can be very effective that way, and fun to play with, but the term itself and the pursuit of Bokeh have become something of a "Pet Rock" in photography lately.

As my Parents used to say: "If you're having fun doing it and not hurting anyone else carry on".

[Bauie]

The first time I came across this overused term was in D&CCT in the 90's. The author seemed pretty proud of himself for inventing this term which, as far as I could see, simply described the out of focus area of a photo shot with a wide aperture. People like to complicate photography, I don't know why, but they do.

[BigMackCam]

I am also anti-intra-muscular medication.

That's what they all say, until it kicks in. Just breathe slowly and deeply, and try to relax. It's going to be OK...

[GUB]

People like to complicate photography, I don't know why, but they do.

What is complicated about making the background less complicated?
All the comments against bokeh here seem to be based on bokeh meaning some flamboyant background.
It is not.
Bokeh is the "quality of the out of focus areas.".
In any image taken from say portaiture to macro will tend to have far more of the image area taken up in out of focus rendering than the area actually pin sharp.
Yes the pin sharp area is almost always the critically important area.
But you have to be plonkers to ignore the qualities in the out of focus area. (we learn this as we learn not to have power poles growing out of people's heads!)
Our English language lacked a simple term for it (having to say out of focus areas).
So the term "bokeh" is a welcome addition to our language for the observant person.

[texandrews]

I feel like I'm having a deja vu about equivalence....

[GUB]

And would anyone here that is saying bokeh is a fad of the digital age care to comment on the bokeh of the Mona Lisa?
Or was Lennie just the starter of the current "fad"?

[GUB]

I feel like I'm having a deja vu about equivalence....

Big difference - the "E" thing was technical and as such there was a "right or wrong"
Here it is all about opinion and your right to express it your way.
But what the heck - start a new "E" thread -- I think this thread was created just for controversy!