Doesn't look like a lot of people know the meaning

Canon EF 50mm f1.2L

06/22/2006 08:32:39 PM · #26

I think if it has color differences, tone differences and or light circles, its bokeh. If its one complete color then its not. Thats how I see it anyway.

Bokeh:

Not Bokeh:

Artifacts

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

06/22/2006 08:50:19 PM · #27

Originally posted by boomtap:

I knew that was going to happen. I didn't enter, because nobody in the forum could really agree on what it ment. It really is a depth of field challenge from the ones I have seen so far.

DOF means depth-of-field which is the distance over which an image is in focus. DOF can be shallow or wide leaving everything in the frame is in sharp focus.

The challenge could be called an "out-of-focus background" challenge based on the stipulation that background bokeh is used to enhance the main subject and that bokeh is the quality or "feel" of the fuzziness in the out-of-focus areas of an image.

Jason_Cross

Nikon D50

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

06/22/2006 09:51:27 PM · #28

Originally posted by stdavidson:

The challenge could be called an "out-of-focus background" challenge .

I agree.

Message edited by author 2006-06-22 21:51:55.

kgeary

Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM for Nikon

06/22/2006 09:53:21 PM · #29

depth of field creates bokeh...bokeh isn't a quality in itself because it is created by something else.

As you are stating, there are different qualities of "bokeh" - bokeh does not mean that it is a high quality blur...it simply means the background is blurred due to DOF.

If you want to say there is good bokeh and bad bokeh that is fine...but the term "bokeh" doesn't mean "GOOD" blur...it simply means blur.

pepperspray

06/22/2006 11:05:11 PM · #30

Originally posted by specialk0783:

depth of field creates bokeh...

True

Originally posted by specialk0783:

bokeh isn't a quality in itself

I disagree, and think you are looking at it through the cultural limitations of "American eyes". (If that makes any sense!)

Originally posted by specialk0783:

As you are stating, there are different qualities of "bokeh" - bokeh does not mean that it is a high quality blur...it simply means the background is blurred due to DOF.

If you want to say there is good bokeh and bad bokeh that is fine...but the term "bokeh" doesn't mean "GOOD" blur...it simply means blur.

There is definitely good and bad bokeh, but I still think it means something more than blur.

Message edited by author 2006-06-22 23:06:22.

kgeary

Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM for Nikon

06/23/2006 08:36:20 AM · #31

What is Oil?

Oil is a substance...

there are different grades of oil...good oil, bad oil, thick oil, thin oil, etc.

But when a car gets its oil changed, and the oil is nasty and dirty...the guy doesn't say "thats not oil"

Consequently, when comparing two oil brands for their inherent qualities, he does not tell the customer, "this is real oil, this one is not"

Now...people take some pictures where you say "thats not bokeh" - that may be true, if the background is not properly thrown out of focus then there IS NO Bokeh (solid color background with no details)...it is not present. Agree? But you can't look at a blurred background and say, "thats not bokeh" - because if the background is blurred then Bokeh is present. Even if its bad oil, it's still oil.

jerseyjim

Nikon D300

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 16-85 f/3.5-5.6G ED VR

06/23/2006 08:47:30 AM · #32

Bokeh = BOHICA

I know I have Bokeh but every time I look at my score I feel I have BOHICA
(for those not in the know....Bend Over Here It Comes Again!)

Man_Called_Horse

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

06/23/2006 08:48:46 AM · #33

So, if a flower is present within the frame, and the bg has some out of foucus dappled light, then this is good bokeh? Is this true???

Wow.

pepperspray

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS II USM Lens

06/23/2006 08:53:01 AM · #34

Originally posted by specialk0783:

Yes, but you're talking about motor oil, and I'm talking about cold-pressed extra-virgin olive oil from Tuscany, infused with white truffle!

;-) :-D

Message edited by author 2006-06-23 08:57:15.

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

06/23/2006 09:03:32 AM · #35

Originally posted by jerseyjim:

Bokeh = BOHICA

I know I have Bokeh but every time I look at my score I feel I have BOHICA
(for those not in the know....Bend Over Here It Comes Again!)

hahn23

Canon EOS-5D Mark IV

06/23/2006 09:06:44 AM · #36

Many seem mystified by the science of "circle of confusion". To paraphrase a line from the Clinton administration, "It's the lens, stupid!"

selmisha

Canon EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM

06/23/2006 09:23:02 AM · #37

Well maybe if the challenge details had been clearer the submission quality would have been better.

"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."

You get what you ask for. In my shot I chose a washed out, out of focus background because I felt it enhanced the power of the subject. From what was requested in the submission details I felt it fit the challenge, however from the comments I have received people are unsure that it qualifies as bokeh. With so many different opinions on what qualifies as bokeh I feel that a more in-depth description of what was expected would have prevented some of the confusion and may guide users to vote properly.

I will say this, I have learned a lot from reading this discussion and trying to substantiate peopleâ��s explanations of bokeh. So to that effect maybe the chaos of uncertainty is an brilliant teacher. :)

colyla

Canon EOS-50D

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM II

06/23/2006 10:29:10 AM · #38

Originally posted by pepperspray:

I disagree, and think you are looking at it through the cultural limitations of "American eyes". (If that makes any sense!)

I'm not really sure what this was suppose to mean ???
Mind you I don't agree with specialk (whatever it is) but I'm thinking, "What does this comment have to do with the tea in china?" (an american saying) Again, just curious.
:)

cpanaioti

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

06/23/2006 10:34:16 AM · #39

Originally posted by pepperspray:

Originally posted by specialk0783:
What is Oil?

Oil is a substance...

there are different grades of oil...good oil, bad oil, thick oil, thin oil, etc.

But when a car gets its oil changed, and the oil is nasty and dirty...the guy doesn't say "thats not oil"

Consequently, when comparing two oil brands for their inherent qualities, he does not tell the customer, "this is real oil, this one is not"

Now...people take some pictures where you say "thats not bokeh" - that may be true, if the background is not properly thrown out of focus then there IS NO Bokeh (solid color background with no details)...it is not present. Agree? But you can't look at a blurred background and say, "thats not bokeh" - because if the background is blurred then Bokeh is present. Even if its bad oil, it's still oil.

Yes, but you're talking about motor oil, and I'm talking about cold-pressed extra-virgin olive oil from Tuscany, infused with white truffle!

;-) :-D

Good answer. :-D

rox_rox

Canon EOS-20D

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

06/23/2006 10:44:37 AM · #40

Originally posted by specialk0783:

When I was young I took my car in for an oil change and the mechanic didn't say "that's not oil". He said "There's NO oil!" Which explained the smoke and knocking sound. Good thing my husband does the car maintenance;)

pepperspray

06/23/2006 10:45:37 AM · #41

Originally posted by colyla:

Originally posted by pepperspray:

I disagree, and think you are looking at it through the cultural limitations of "American eyes". (If that makes any sense!)

I'm not really sure what this was suppose to mean ???
Mind you I don't agree with specialk (whatever it is) but I'm thinking, "What does this comment have to do with the tea in china?" (an american saying) Again, just curious.
:)

Please don't take offense, as none is intended.

I think we are all limited by our own cultures when trying to understand the more abstract concepts of a completely foreign (to us) culture.

Am I making any sense?

Message edited by author 2006-06-23 10:45:54.

ElGordo

Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS for Canon

06/23/2006 11:07:18 AM · #42

Because 'Bokeh' is a characteristic of nearly all photographs*, varying only by degree, voters and entrants are free to interpret in any manner they choose. But the voters are not so stupid as to give a high score to an image that exhibits very little of this desired characteristic!

*Example: photos of celestial objects like stars will exhibit a uniform lack of 'bokeh' across the field, provided there are no foreground objects.

troberge

Canon EOS-20D

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

06/23/2006 11:12:24 AM · #43

Ok, this makes me slightly peeved in that on one hand everyone screams..stick to the challenge description and then on the other they vote people down for doing it! Challenge descrition said..

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.
text

Now, are you all saying we should have ignored that? I did a shot that had the "out-of-focus" background and my subject really stands out against it, however I am currently at 4.7...technically my shot is really good (I suppose we all say that) but obviously it is not what all the "professionals/more experienced members" consider bokeh! DPChallenge is a learning site..many of us are beginners and just because a shot does not fit into your "definition" of bokeh, at least open your mind to the possibility that others are going by the challenge description as well and vote fairly. Instead of starting and continuing threads patronizing us on why we are no good because we do not understand the "true" meaning of bokeh, how about using your energy to leave some comments that will let us know how we could improve our shots and why you voted us so low. Give us the benefit of your wisdom instead of coming here and gloating about how much you know and how little the rest of us know.

Prof_Fate

06/23/2006 11:37:33 AM · #44

This is not a bokeh-quality challenge, is it? I didn't see that in the description.

The way i read it is that the subject is to be enhanced by the bokeh. that is open to some interpretation as well, but one should not be voting on DOF or bokeh quality.

the last bokeh challenge i entered this

. A completely different take on bokeh, if by today's definition it could even be called bokeh. My current entry is many times better and shows true bokeh, which enhances the subject - and it's only doing .2 better.

So I then ask - how much site turnover have we had in the past 18 months? Are we essentially staring over, educating a large new blokc of voters as to what bokeh is?

Dragn

Canon PowerShot SD750

06/23/2006 01:01:23 PM · #45

I voted on all of the 30 sec ones...but for the bokeh...Im lost. From what I understand Bokeh is after reading everything in the forums and studying wiki...what makes bokeh is the background itself...that theres some artisitc or pleasing quality about the out of focus area, not just a backdrop to the focused subject.

A lot of pics I saw were not what I understand bokeh to be. Either that, or theres no out of focus area at all...I just dont have the heart to vote for this one because Id be giving a lot of low scores baed on my interpretation. :(

frisca

Nikon D70

06/23/2006 01:09:59 PM · #46

folks! Just a reminder that its OK to talk about a challenge while it is going on, but don't talk about specific entries or otherwise attempt to affect how voting occurs.

kgeary