bokeh anyone? - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

06/18/2006 09:16:13 AM · #234

For the DNMCers that take meeting the challenge seriously it might be best to think of this as an out-of-focus background challenge. If the background is out-of-focus then it meets the challenge.

If you enter the challenge be advised that the existence of an out-of-focus background is not enough to guarantee a decent score. There needs to be more to it than that. The out-of-focus background should be a necessary element that adds significantly to the strength of the composition and, when absent, ruins the picture. It may be used to highlight the main subject, or convey the main subject's context, or mood, or "feeling", or a sense of place, or some such "something" whose presence is necessary to make the image strong.

3eyedcrow

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV

06/18/2006 09:58:29 AM · #235

Well said.

obsidian

Nikon D80

Tamron AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di II for Nikon

06/18/2006 02:56:16 PM · #236

One of the joys of the site is the challenges. One of the curses for me is the liberal interpretation of the challenges wherein sometimes images that only "just" fall under the definition tend to do well because they are great photographs.

In my more cynical moments I sometimes wonder if I submit a photo that is pretty pleasing and "kind of" meets the challenge isn't the way to go.

On the other hand, I am learning such a lot here that I guess I really don't care - except sometimes :-)

posthumous

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

06/18/2006 03:20:36 PM · #237

I'm afraid I wasn't able to get through the whole thread because of the bad signal-to-noise ratio, but I do have advice for people tempted to add blur in Photoshop...

If it ain't bokeh, don't fix it!

06/18/2006 03:21:28 PM · #238

This may be the first challenge where I actually split the points to come up with my vote. By that I mean I'd give 0-5 points for the Bokeh, and then 0-5 more points for the subject. You can have the best bokeh in the world, but if the picture is of a kid spewing on his shoes, well, that's not gonna score well in my book.

I'm also in the doesn't need circles of light camp. However, if you can pull of an excellent picture WITH circles of light, that may be worth an extra point.

yanko

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

06/18/2006 03:31:58 PM · #239

I'm afraid but I'm in! :P

Artifacts

Canon PowerShot Pro 90 IS

06/18/2006 04:14:56 PM · #240

Originally posted by obsidian:

... One of the curses for me is the liberal interpretation of the challenges wherein sometimes images that only "just" fall under the definition tend to do well because they are great photographs.

Obsidian, not trying to sound facetious here, but what IS the correct interpretation for this challenge?

Seems like there has been a considerable amount of discussion about this topic yet there is still wide disagreement. Given its description, how can you take anything but a liberal interpretation of this particular challenge?

coolhar

06/18/2006 06:25:18 PM · #241

Originally posted by stdavidson:

... but what IS the correct interpretation for this challenge? ...

Everyone knows the correct interpretation. It's what you interpert it to be, with the you being each individual entering photographer and each individual voter. The correct interpretation will not be found in the forums.

Message edited by author 2006-06-18 18:26:31.

obsidian

Nikon D80

Tamron AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di II for Nikon

06/18/2006 06:49:18 PM · #242

Originally posted by stdavidson:

Originally posted by obsidian:
... One of the curses for me is the liberal interpretation of the challenges wherein sometimes images that only "just" fall under the definition tend to do well because they are great photographs.

Obsidian, not trying to sound facetious here, but what IS the correct interpretation for this challenge?

Seems like there has been a considerable amount of discussion about this topic yet there is still wide disagreement. Given its description, how can you take anything but a liberal interpretation of this particular challenge?

You know, I very rarely get accused of being facetious and it kind of erks me BUT you have a point. So, in terms of interpretation, the original challenge description:

Loosely defined, bokeh is the quality and "feel" of the out-of-focus foreground or background elements of a photo. It isn't very interesting by itself, but take a photograph whose subject is enhanced by the bokeh of the background.

As we have seen many times in this thread, the definition of bokeh itself is along the lines of:

The Japanese apparently refer to the quality of the out-of-focus image as b"boke" "Understanding Boke", Harold M Merklinger

The quality of the out-of-focus image is due to the aptly named "circle of confusion (COF)" and that this manifests itself as a form of spherical aberration through a lens. Crudely, "good boke" could equate to normal spherical aberration (no bright ring around the aberration) and "bad boke" could be caused by over-corrected spherical aberration (bright rings around the edges of the "sphere").

So, there is perceived to be good and bad boke and this is a function of the lens used.

In terms of the challenge, therefore, I would be looking for an appealing (adding to the composition) out-of-focus background exhibiting spherical aberration, probably as circular "blobs" of colour blur. Plain old out off focus through shallow DOF doesn't seem to count to me and therefore could be construed to be DNMC.

So, is my interpretation liberal? I don't think so as there are qualities to the out of focus elements of the image that should be aligned with the definition of the way boke manifests itself: as blobs of spherical aberration.

On the other hand, this is my interpretation and, as this thread has proven, there seem to be many, many more.

As to the remark by coolhar re interpretation: that is my point entirely! Hence my complaint/concern/acceptance of life. I do not have to agree with it but it is a fact.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

06/18/2006 07:04:14 PM · #243

Originally posted by pepperspray:

Just to clarify: this challenge is all about background bokeh, and foreground bokeh would not meet the challenge, right?

The challenge description says "... foreground or background elements ..."

Funny how people always seem to want to interpret the challenge definition so literally except when it tells them to be broad-minded ...

Message edited by author 2006-06-18 19:05:01.

Artifacts

06/18/2006 07:47:46 PM · #244

Originally posted by obsidian:

Originally posted by stdavidson:

Obsidian, not trying to sound facetious here, but what IS the correct interpretation for this challenge?

You know, I very rarely get accused of being facetious and it kind of erks me BUT you have a point. So, in terms of interpretation, the original challenge description:...

Please don't misinterpret, I was not accusing you of being facetious. I was trying not to sound facetious myself by asking your opinion on what seems like a legitimate question based on the lack of group agreement.

Message edited by author 2006-06-18 19:48:58.

06/18/2006 09:41:15 PM · #245

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by pepperspray:
Just to clarify: this challenge is all about background bokeh, and foreground bokeh would not meet the challenge, right?

The challenge description says "... foreground or background elements ..."

Funny how people always seem to want to interpret the challenge definition so literally except when it tells them to be broad-minded ...

Before you get too up in arms, you can see how pepperspray came to this conclusion...

"Loosely defined, bokeh is the quality and "feel" of the out-of-focus foreground or background elements of a photo. It isn't very interesting by itself, but take a photograph whose subject is enhanced by the bokeh of the background."

The description is poorly written.

Fujifilm FinePix S5500 Zoom

06/18/2006 09:50:28 PM · #246

Originally posted by obsidian:

In terms of the challenge, therefore, I would be looking for an appealing (adding to the composition) out-of-focus background exhibiting spherical aberration, probably as circular "blobs" of colour blur. Plain old out off focus through shallow DOF doesn't seem to count to me and therefore could be construed to be DNMC.

The problem here is that all OOF areas of a shallow DOF come from "circular blobs of color blur". They often run together in a way that hides their circular nature, but they are circular none-the-less. When we see actual circular bokeh, it comes from points of light which are at high contrast to their surroundings, that way they stand out from the other circular blobs and still retain their shape.

I think personally, people should check their personal interpretations of the word at the door. Imagine you do not read the forums and you enter the challenge with the description "Loosely defined, bokeh is the quality and 'feel' of the out-of-focus...elements of a photo". You even take it one step further and look up bokeh at dictionary.com

Main Entry: bokeh
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: a Japanese term for the subjective aesthetic quality of out-of-focus areas of a photographic image
Example: The bokeh, or quality of the blurred image in the photograph, was described and discussed.

How are you going to feel when you get the comment, "DNMC, I see no circular abberation. 2"?

Sure, everybody has their own right to vote how they please...blah blah blah; but if I choose to give all pictures that don't have RED bokeh a 1 because I feel true bokeh is red bokeh, am I gonna be appreciated?

I think this conversation has gone too far. It's a great academic exercise and fun to debate, but the average entrant (and the average entrant DOESN'T read the forums) is not going to appreciated the "good bokeh equals points of light" argument...

Message edited by author 2006-06-18 21:51:01.

DAWAR

06/18/2006 10:17:08 PM · #247

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by obsidian:

Plain old out off focus through shallow DOF doesn't seem to count to me and therefore could be construed to be DNMC.

The problem here is that all OOF areas of a shallow DOF come from "circular blobs of color blur". They often run together in a way that hides their circular nature, but they are circular none-the-less. When we see actual circular bokeh, it comes from points of light which are at high contrast to their surroundings, that way they stand out from the other circular blobs and still retain their shape.

How are you going to feel when you get the comment, "DNMC, I see no circular abberation. 2"?

I think this conversation has gone too far. It's a great academic exercise and fun to debate, but the average entrant (and the average entrant DOESN'T read the forums) is not going to appreciated the "good bokeh equals points of light" argument...

I agree with your views DrAchoo.

Message edited by author 2006-06-18 22:18:31.

pepperspray

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

06/18/2006 10:44:44 PM · #248

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by pepperspray:
Just to clarify: this challenge is all about background bokeh, and foreground bokeh would not meet the challenge, right?

The challenge description says "... foreground or background elements ..."

Funny how people always seem to want to interpret the challenge definition so literally except when it tells them to be broad-minded ...

Before you get too up in arms, you can see how pepperspray came to this conclusion...

"Loosely defined, bokeh is the quality and "feel" of the out-of-focus foreground or background elements of a photo. It isn't very interesting by itself, but take a photograph whose subject is enhanced by the bokeh of the background."

The description is poorly written.

Thank you, DrAchoo.

I definitely wasn't trying to be uptight about the whole thing, simply trying to understand the intent of this particular challenge according to those who wrote it. Thanks for understanding the spirit of my question. :-)

sacredspirit

Canon EOS-600D/T3i Rebel

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

06/19/2006 04:26:11 PM · #249

I cant do it! I have been messing with this thing, and messing, but to no good effect.

I have used both my P and S, and my 300. If anybody gots a hint or two I would sincerely appreciate it.

If I keep it up my camera is going to be "bokeh", because Im going to throw it through a window.