Stimulating the economy - photographically

**pacerr** · 11-19-2011, 09:48 AM

Originally posted by Ron Kruger in the PW forum:

". . .and [the] background would be bokehated (new word)."

- - - - -

bokehated = adj.

OK, so that leads to . . .

Bokehenator = noun: one who commits or causes bokeh

Bokenate = verb: to cause bokeh to appear or improve

De-bokehenate = verb: to cause bokeh to disappear or degrade

Bokehenation; de- = the result of Bokehenating; de-bokehenating

and lot's of new job classifications too:

Apprentice Bokehenator (AB)

Assistant Bokehenator

Associate Bokehenator

Junior Bokehenator (JrB)

Journeyman Bokehenator (JnB)

Able Bokehenator (special maritime/naval photography position when performed by an Able Seaman)

Master Bokehenator (MB)

Bokehenator Supervisor (a BS-er ?)

Senior Overseer of Bokehenation (an SOB ?)

See, creating jobs in a down economy is easy!

H2

Fortunately, no photos are associated with this goat-ropin' exercise.

Last edited by pacerr; 11-19-2011 at 09:57 AM.

RioRico · 11-19-2011, 11:22 AM

antidisestablishmenbokehnism

vonBaloney · 11-19-2011, 11:27 AM

When I learned photography, there was no word for bokeh. What ever did we talk about?

RioRico · 11-19-2011, 12:04 PM

Originally posted by vonBaloney

What ever did we talk about?

Sex. Drugs. Music. Politics. Cars. Sports. Sex. Whatever.

Oh, you mean photographically? Regarding OOF (out of focus) areas? We didn't. We didn't talk about crap.factors either, nor white balance, nor chimping. No pixel-peeping. No IQ rants. None of that stuff. Ah, to be young and innocent...

vonBaloney · 11-19-2011, 12:16 PM

I'm trying to remember if we ever did talk about OOF in my photo classes. We definitely talked about depth of field, f-stops (& with cinematography, sometimes t-stops -- ahh..t-stops.), tonal range, shadow detail, highlight detail, foreground, background, color palette. We talked about white balance and color temperature a fair bit actually when doing color -- for a while I developed the super-power of being able to see color temperature easily with my own eyes under different kinds of lights. We talked about lens flare once in a while, but I really can't recall talking about "creamy" OOFs or any some such. I think we did observe that the background often needs to be sharp and in-focus or very out-of-focus as that slightly out-of-focus look is just distracting, but that was about it.

I was reading something from the guy that coined the term bokeh (which was around 1995, I think?) and they had lots of complaints to his magazine that it was inappropriate to talk about the OOF areas and no one should be thinking about such things. Weird...

panoguy · 11-20-2011, 12:06 PM

Originally posted by vonBaloney

I was reading something from the guy that coined the term bokeh (which was around 1995, I think?) and they had lots of complaints to his magazine that it was inappropriate to talk about the OOF areas and no one should be thinking about such things. Weird...

Blame Mike Johnston, currently of The Online Photographer, formerly of Photo Techniques magazine. He only added the "h" to aid in pronunciation, so we're not all "going for boke."

However, it's been discussed as a property of a photograph for a very, very long time.

vonBaloney · 11-20-2011, 12:13 PM

Originally posted by panoguy

Blame Mike Johnston, currently of The Online Photographer, formerly of Photo Techniques magazine. He only added the "h" to aid in pronunciation, so we're not all "going for boke."

However, it's been discussed as a property of a photograph for a very, very long time.

Pretty much no one used the word in English until he did that -- he effectively invented it (for North America, anyway). Obviously everything about a photograph was previously discussed, but that really seemed to crystallize it as a mainstream concept. When people talk about lenses now, the second or third thing they say will be about bokeh. (And I certainly don't remember people putting special caps on their lenses with heart-shaped (and other shaped) cutouts to achieve custom bokeh effects. People are obsessed with bokeh now...

panoguy · 11-20-2011, 05:38 PM

Originally posted by vonBaloney

Pretty much no one used the word in English until he did that -- he effectively invented it (for North America, anyway).

You really think so? Hmmm...

vonBaloney · 11-20-2011, 05:42 PM

Originally posted by panoguy

You really think so? Hmmm...

If you can find the term in any mainstream photography book or magazine prior to the 90s, I'll will be proven wrong.

11-19-2011, 09:48 AM	#1
pacerr Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Paris, TN Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,350	Stimulating the economy - photographically Originally posted by Ron Kruger in the PW forum: ". . .and [the] background would be bokehated (new word)." - - - - - bokehated = adj. OK, so that leads to . . . Bokehenator = noun: one who commits or causes bokeh Bokenate = verb: to cause bokeh to appear or improve De-bokehenate = verb: to cause bokeh to disappear or degrade Bokehenation; de- = the result of Bokehenating; de-bokehenating and lot's of new job classifications too: Apprentice Bokehenator (AB) Assistant Bokehenator Associate Bokehenator Junior Bokehenator (JrB) Journeyman Bokehenator (JnB) Able Bokehenator (special maritime/naval photography position when performed by an Able Seaman) Master Bokehenator (MB) Bokehenator Supervisor (a BS-er ?) Senior Overseer of Bokehenation (an SOB ?) See, creating jobs in a down economy is easy! H2 Fortunately, no photos are associated with this goat-ropin' exercise. Last edited by pacerr; 11-19-2011 at 09:57 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Trashing the economy plan a and b	jeffkrol	General Talk	25	06-14-2011 08:51 AM
It's NOT about the economy	jeffkrol	General Talk	4	10-07-2010 09:00 AM
sobering look at global economy	gokenin	General Talk	28	09-08-2010 04:47 PM
The Economy Is Improving	graphicgr8s	General Talk	22	05-21-2010 07:26 PM
Photographically impressive documentary	causey	General Talk	5	02-21-2010 05:32 PM

11-19-2011, 11:22 AM	#2
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	antidisestablishmenbokehnism

11-19-2011, 11:27 AM	#3
vonBaloney Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Albuquerque, NM Posts: 6,029	When I learned photography, there was no word for bokeh. What ever did we talk about?

11-19-2011, 12:04 PM	#4
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Originally posted by vonBaloney What ever did we talk about? Sex. Drugs. Music. Politics. Cars. Sports. Sex. Whatever. Oh, you mean photographically? Regarding OOF (out of focus) areas? We didn't. We didn't talk about crap.factors either, nor white balance, nor chimping. No pixel-peeping. No IQ rants. None of that stuff. Ah, to be young and innocent...

11-19-2011, 12:16 PM	#5
vonBaloney Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Albuquerque, NM Posts: 6,029	I'm trying to remember if we ever did talk about OOF in my photo classes. We definitely talked about depth of field, f-stops (& with cinematography, sometimes t-stops -- ahh..t-stops.), tonal range, shadow detail, highlight detail, foreground, background, color palette. We talked about white balance and color temperature a fair bit actually when doing color -- for a while I developed the super-power of being able to see color temperature easily with my own eyes under different kinds of lights. We talked about lens flare once in a while, but I really can't recall talking about "creamy" OOFs or any some such. I think we did observe that the background often needs to be sharp and in-focus or very out-of-focus as that slightly out-of-focus look is just distracting, but that was about it. I was reading something from the guy that coined the term bokeh (which was around 1995, I think?) and they had lots of complaints to his magazine that it was inappropriate to talk about the OOF areas and no one should be thinking about such things. Weird...

11-20-2011, 12:06 PM	#6
panoguy Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Washington, D.C. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,327	Originally posted by vonBaloney I was reading something from the guy that coined the term bokeh (which was around 1995, I think?) and they had lots of complaints to his magazine that it was inappropriate to talk about the OOF areas and no one should be thinking about such things. Weird... Blame Mike Johnston, currently of The Online Photographer, formerly of Photo Techniques magazine. He only added the "h" to aid in pronunciation, so we're not all "going for boke." However, it's been discussed as a property of a photograph for a very, very long time.

11-20-2011, 12:13 PM	#7
vonBaloney Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Albuquerque, NM Posts: 6,029	Originally posted by panoguy Blame Mike Johnston, currently of The Online Photographer, formerly of Photo Techniques magazine. He only added the "h" to aid in pronunciation, so we're not all "going for boke." However, it's been discussed as a property of a photograph for a very, very long time. Pretty much no one used the word in English until he did that -- he effectively invented it (for North America, anyway). Obviously everything about a photograph was previously discussed, but that really seemed to crystallize it as a mainstream concept. When people talk about lenses now, the second or third thing they say will be about bokeh. (And I certainly don't remember people putting special caps on their lenses with heart-shaped (and other shaped) cutouts to achieve custom bokeh effects. People are obsessed with bokeh now...

11-20-2011, 05:38 PM	#8
panoguy Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Washington, D.C. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,327	Originally posted by vonBaloney Pretty much no one used the word in English until he did that -- he effectively invented it (for North America, anyway). You really think so? Hmmm...

11-20-2011, 05:42 PM	#9
vonBaloney Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Albuquerque, NM Posts: 6,029	Originally posted by panoguy You really think so? Hmmm... If you can find the term in any mainstream photography book or magazine prior to the 90s, I'll will be proven wrong.