Poll: Let's talk about bokeh

Myltlpny · 10-28-2007, 06:33 AM

While I've been playing around with photography for over 20 years, bokeh is not a term I've come across until I joined this forum. That's why I joined a forum, to learn new things.
So, if I'm understanding the term correctly, bokeh is the comparative depth of field for lenses of comparable focal length, aperature, etc. Is that a fair statement?
By the way, I liked photo #1. The background was the least distracting and highlighted the flower better.

MikeH · 10-28-2007, 12:04 PM

Originally posted by Photo Tramp

I have to agree with Stewart, in as far as taking shots for customers. Even in most competitions, or Art shows I have never heard a judge say I think the photograph has nice Bokeh In fact I think very few (other than the photographers) know what they are looking at. People look at a shot and either it appeals to them or it doesn't.

It may be that many people don't know the term "bokeh". That doesn't make it an invalid method of giving critique. It's simply a term used to describe the quality of an out of focus area. Compare a photo with smooth OOF areas (ie: smooth bokeh) to a photo with harsh, distracting OOF areas (poor or rough bokeh) - you need a term to describe the difference. There is an obvious difference between the two, and it affects the look of an image. One is more pleasing to the eye, and is therefore more desireable!

Mike

**Lowell Goudge** · 10-29-2007, 06:51 AM

Originally posted by Myltlpny

So, if I'm understanding the term correctly, bokeh is the comparative depth of field for lenses of comparable focal length, aperature, etc. Is that a fair statement?

Not quite, bokeh is a subjective evaluation of the out of focus patterns and effects of a lens. For example, a mirror lens has unique bokeh where out of focus points show up as donuts due to the blockin gout of the center of the objective lens/mirror with the secondary mirror.

Quote:

By the way, I liked photo #1. The background was the least distracting and highlighted the flower better.

Me too. fade to dark gives little distraction, and good contrast to the light image

**Ahab** · 10-29-2007, 09:14 AM

I guess I'm in the minority. I like #3 because I see more detail in the flower.

mattdm · 10-29-2007, 09:29 AM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

Not quite, bokeh is a subjective evaluation of the out of focus patterns and effects of a lens. For example, a mirror lens has unique bokeh where out of focus points show up as donuts due to the blockin gout of the center of the objective lens/mirror with the secondary mirror.
Me too. fade to dark gives little distraction, and good contrast to the light image

I believe originally the term specifically referred to the qualities of out-of-focus foreground elements, but is clearly used more generally now.

It's all very subjective, but in general, the more circular the better (more aperture blades). "Donut-like" circles in bokeh are considered bad; flat, even circles are the ideal. Distracting and jittery is definitely bad.

m8o · 10-31-2007, 05:04 PM

While I understand the formal definition being conveyed. And while I understand how it differs from how I and many others 'use' it, one can't help but go with the tide where the vernacular has taken on the meaning of subjective and pleasing bg (or fg) that makes the subject 'pop'. I notice a contrast in acceptance of that usage between some here, and DGrin, where you'll find a thread contributed to by many professionals who make a living in nature and wildlife photgraphy...with some of the most amazing pictures I've seen. (granted, some in the midle of the 2nd page didn't quite 'get' it)
Your best bokeh!
No strict objections to its use on the basis of formal semantics there...

Syb · 11-01-2007, 12:49 AM

Originally posted by m8o

...with some of the most amazing pictures I've seen.
Your best bokeh!

I second that. Those shots are amazing! Birds while flying having dinner, or sitting and looking at their next thing to eat. Thanks a lot for posting that one. Though i think the less detail there is in a bokeh, the better it is - especially when the bokeh is the result of a lens construction, instead of something in the background - that means that there are better and worse bokeh's... but the overall background blur quality is verrrrrry high in that thread.

View Poll Results: Which bokeh do you prefer?
I think bokeh 1 is the best	24	57.14%
I think bokeh 2 is the best	14	33.33%
I think bokeh 3 is the best	4	9.52%
Voters: 42. You may not vote on this poll

10-31-2007, 05:04 PM	#21
m8o Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: 40°-55'-44" N / 73°-24'-07" W [on LI] Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,092	While I understand the formal definition being conveyed. And while I understand how it differs from how I and many others 'use' it, one can't help but go with the tide where the vernacular has taken on the meaning of subjective and pleasing bg (or fg) that makes the subject 'pop'. I notice a contrast in acceptance of that usage between some here, and DGrin, where you'll find a thread contributed to by many professionals who make a living in nature and wildlife photgraphy...with some of the most amazing pictures I've seen. (granted, some in the midle of the 2nd page didn't quite 'get' it) Your best bokeh! No strict objections to its use on the basis of formal semantics there... Last edited by m8o; 10-31-2007 at 05:12 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Streets Need to talk?	skinja	Post Your Photos!	4	09-02-2010 11:31 PM
Lens talk	NecroticSoldier	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	13	04-25-2010 06:41 PM
Bokina versus Bokeh Monster, which bokeh you prefer?	Pentaxor	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	04-21-2010 01:50 AM
Talk about IQ	mithrandir	General Talk	3	08-29-2009 08:38 AM
Talk me out of this...	FHPhotographer	Photographic Technique	40	08-06-2009 07:47 AM

10-28-2007, 06:33 AM	#16
Myltlpny Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Gloucester, VA Photos: Gallery Posts: 27	While I've been playing around with photography for over 20 years, bokeh is not a term I've come across until I joined this forum. That's why I joined a forum, to learn new things. So, if I'm understanding the term correctly, bokeh is the comparative depth of field for lenses of comparable focal length, aperature, etc. Is that a fair statement? By the way, I liked photo #1. The background was the least distracting and highlighted the flower better.

10-28-2007, 12:04 PM	#17
MikeH Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Edmonton, Alberta Photos: Albums Posts: 273	Originally posted by Photo Tramp I have to agree with Stewart, in as far as taking shots for customers. Even in most competitions, or Art shows I have never heard a judge say I think the photograph has nice Bokeh In fact I think very few (other than the photographers) know what they are looking at. People look at a shot and either it appeals to them or it doesn't. It may be that many people don't know the term "bokeh". That doesn't make it an invalid method of giving critique. It's simply a term used to describe the quality of an out of focus area. Compare a photo with smooth OOF areas (ie: smooth bokeh) to a photo with harsh, distracting OOF areas (poor or rough bokeh) - you need a term to describe the difference. There is an obvious difference between the two, and it affects the look of an image. One is more pleasing to the eye, and is therefore more desireable! Mike

10-29-2007, 06:51 AM	#18
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,891	Originally posted by Myltlpny So, if I'm understanding the term correctly, bokeh is the comparative depth of field for lenses of comparable focal length, aperature, etc. Is that a fair statement? Not quite, bokeh is a subjective evaluation of the out of focus patterns and effects of a lens. For example, a mirror lens has unique bokeh where out of focus points show up as donuts due to the blockin gout of the center of the objective lens/mirror with the secondary mirror. Quote: By the way, I liked photo #1. The background was the least distracting and highlighted the flower better. Me too. fade to dark gives little distraction, and good contrast to the light image

10-29-2007, 09:14 AM	#19
Ahab Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Arnold, Md. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 762	I guess I'm in the minority. I like #3 because I see more detail in the flower.

10-29-2007, 09:29 AM	#20
mattdm Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Boston, MA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,948	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge Not quite, bokeh is a subjective evaluation of the out of focus patterns and effects of a lens. For example, a mirror lens has unique bokeh where out of focus points show up as donuts due to the blockin gout of the center of the objective lens/mirror with the secondary mirror. Me too. fade to dark gives little distraction, and good contrast to the light image I believe originally the term specifically referred to the qualities of out-of-focus foreground elements, but is clearly used more generally now. It's all very subjective, but in general, the more circular the better (more aperture blades). "Donut-like" circles in bokeh are considered bad; flat, even circles are the ideal. Distracting and jittery is definitely bad.

11-01-2007, 12:49 AM	#22
Syb Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Near Utrecht, Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,221 Original Poster	Originally posted by m8o ...with some of the most amazing pictures I've seen. Your best bokeh! I second that. Those shots are amazing! Birds while flying having dinner, or sitting and looking at their next thing to eat. Thanks a lot for posting that one. Though i think the less detail there is in a bokeh, the better it is - especially when the bokeh is the result of a lens construction, instead of something in the background - that means that there are better and worse bokeh's... but the overall background blur quality is verrrrrry high in that thread.