| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/24/2006 02:34:57 PM · #26 |
Do you think if we had a Bokeh challenge once a month for the next 2 years we would be able to have a general concensus on what bokeh is? :D
edit to add - Certainly at some point we would get tired of discussing it and just shoot it (choose your definition of shoot).
Message edited by author 2006-10-24 14:37:09. |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 02:38:05 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by elwoodsplace:
It isn't very interesting by itself, but take a photograph whose subject is enhanced by the bokeh of the background. |
Hehe... fair enough, but I look at the challenge descriptions as a guideline, not a list of "thou shalts." Enter a shot with good bokeh and don't sweat the minutae. ;-)
Message edited by author 2006-10-24 14:38:18. |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 02:38:13 PM · #28 |
According to Bokeh II,
It's not the CIRCLES!!!
|
|
|
|
10/24/2006 02:38:37 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Do you think if we had a Bokeh challenge once a month for the next 2 years we would be able to have a general concensus on what bokeh is? :D
edit to add - Certainly at some point we would get tired of discussing it and just shoot it (choose your definition of shoot). |
That would be a long two years of fighting about it...lol
Message edited by author 2006-10-24 14:39:01. |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 02:38:39 PM · #30 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Do you think if we had a Bokeh challenge once a month for the next 2 years we would be able to have a general concensus on what bokeh is? :D
edit to add - Certainly at some point we would get tired of discussing it and just shoot it (choose your definition of shoot). |
ROFL YES!!!
Just dug up my originals from earlier in the week, and I'm reworking them.
|
|
|
|
10/24/2006 02:40:24 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by elwoodsplace:
It isn't very interesting by itself, but take a photograph whose subject is enhanced by the bokeh of the background. |
Hehe... fair enough, but I look at the challenge descriptions as a guideline, not a list of "thou shalts." Enter a shot with good bokeh and don't sweat the minutae. ;-) |
Oh, bummer! He sounds very happy with himself. He sounds like he has another killer shot ready. OYYYYY!!! |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 02:41:16 PM · #32 |
When I hear Bokeh, this collection comes to mind:
 |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 02:42:58 PM · #33 |
you're asking the question wrong. bokeh is subjective. it's the _quality_ of the out of focus area. so yes. it _has_ bokeh, in the sense that everyone can sing.
the question, then, is it _good_ bokeh? in the case of the ducks, i'd say medocre bokeh. nothing really special about it.
and as for the silly little dots... those appear in every photo ever taken that has any blur. you might not see them because they end up larger than the sensor or blend into a solid color background. but any light that enters the lens is going to be spread out in this pattern. it is only highlights, such as the ones on the rail in that photo, that are small enough to be rendered inside the image area.
at least this is how my tiny brain understands it... but i do have a photobowl ribbon to back it up...
Message edited by author 2006-10-24 14:43:04.
|
|
|
|
10/24/2006 02:49:07 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by BradP:
When I hear Bokeh, this collection comes to mind:
|
Ok I need some sort of expert photo buddy that can look at two of the images I have and help me make a decision. I am going to beat myself up over this! Are photobuddies even allowed?
Message edited by author 2006-10-24 14:49:42. |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 02:51:14 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by stdavidson:
The challenge description specifically says background... |
No it doesn't: "...the out-of-focus foreground or background elements..." |
It goes on to say: "...take a photograph whose subject is enhanced by the bokeh of the background."
It doesn't exclude foreground bokeh, of course, but it sounds pretty specific. Not saying it can't be included very effectively, but you are taking a chance doing so. Challenge 'purists' could be offended.
|
|
|
|
10/24/2006 02:51:22 PM · #36 |
It seems like the foreground part of the image is even more important than the background ... if you have bokeh and the foreground is awesome and in focus ... you're good to go.
last bokeh challenge
Message edited by author 2006-10-24 14:52:20.
|
|
|
|
10/24/2006 02:54:10 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by boomtap:
Ok I need some sort of expert photo buddy that can look at two of the images I have and help me make a decision. I am going to beat myself up over this! Are photobuddies even allowed? |
I am not in this challenge and I am not going to vote it either. I placed 11th in the last BoKeh challenge and have a pretty good idea what it is. I would be happy to take a look if you want just PM me. |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 02:54:31 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by boomtap:
Originally posted by BradP:
When I hear Bokeh, this collection comes to mind:
|
Ok I need some sort of expert photo buddy that can look at two of the images I have and help me make a decision. I am going to beat myself up over this! Are photobuddies even allowed? |
Photobuddies are OK as long as you help each other with images, but not (NO, NEVER) if you help each other by giving high scores to each other. |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 02:55:46 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by metatate:
According to Bokeh II,
It's not the CIRCLES!!!
|
Maybe, maybe not. 6 of the top 10 in that challenge have some bokeh circles adding to the image.
The makeup of DPC has changed certainly since then (some people joined, some left), so voting will be (what) this time?
The time period is different and subject choices will vary from the last Bokeh challenge.
Go figure. Better yet - take a shot you like and enter it. Should be interesting. Not sure what will be more fun...looking at the images in the challenge, or watching the forum threads light up! :D |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 02:59:38 PM · #40 |
The description is best defined by what the voters think:
Bokeh II results
Bokeh I results [/quote]
I think you're right: ultimately the voting community comes to an unspoken agreement. I think the results from Bokeh1 show a greater variety than Bokeh11... |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 03:01:19 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by boomtap:
I am going by the previous winners. That is the only way to tell what voters think is bokeh. |
Yep, and neither of the blue ribbon winners had the circles. I like the circles but they do not define bokeh. They may add or distract from what what one considers good bokeh.
Am I really participating in this endless debate??? :|
|
|
|
|
10/24/2006 03:06:45 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by dallasdux:
Am I really participating in this endless debate??? :| |
You are, but I was thinking the same thing, after really confusing myself and looking at the "shallow DOF challenge," which has bokeh but that's not the subject of the challenge.
Shallow DOF Challenge
|
|
|
|
10/24/2006 03:09:33 PM · #43 |
| I noticed a diffrence between the shallow and the bokeh. The shallow is more defined by in large. The bokeh is really almost like creating a interesting abstract background if that makes any sense to anybody. |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 03:15:09 PM · #44 |
YES, but many of the Shallow DOF entries certainly would have done well in both of the bokeh challenges. Just showing some variance to the circles.
|
|
|
|
10/24/2006 03:16:20 PM · #45 |
I think these are all circular arguments ;-)
Well, somebody had to say it! |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 03:21:46 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by dallasdux:
Yep, and neither of the blue ribbon winners had the circles. I like the circles but they do not define bokeh. They may add or distract from what what one considers good bokeh.
Am I really participating in this endless debate??? :| |
Actually I have a clear circle. :) People don't realize it because it's dark and not light. That purple splotch isn't a giant blueberry or something. The circles will come when you have an area of large contrast. Usually we see this when we have pinpoints of light, but the effect will also come with pinpoints of "dark"...
|
|
|
|
10/24/2006 03:24:17 PM · #47 |
I kinda think the challenge description is pretty clearâ€Â¦.
Loosely defined, bokeh is the quality and "feel" of the out-of-focus foreground or background
No mention of circles – just quality and feel – and specific mention of both foreground and background elements.
take a photograph whose subject is enhanced by the bokeh of the background.
So not just a blurred or circled background but one that actually serves to enhance the imageâ€Â¦ ok somewhat sloppily ambiguous by only referencing the more common use of background and not specifically including the foreground here, but if foreground is to be excluded its reference in the first sentence would be redundant.
Message edited by author 2006-10-24 15:33:42. |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 03:45:14 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
I think these are all circular arguments ;-)
Well, somebody had to say it! |
haha |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 03:53:36 PM · #49 |
circle of confusion n. Group of photographers trying to define Boke
Boke(h)
Message edited by author 2006-10-24 15:55:16. |
|
|
|
10/24/2006 04:00:01 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
|
Unfortunately, the rules for Bokeh III specifically state a photograph with a subject. I see no subject in your example.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/27/2025 09:59:43 AM EDT.
