Fore Bokeh - Technique Challenge

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

11/25/2005 09:14:32 PM · #1

Similar to the Bokeh Challenge held Jan. 3 2005 - Jan. 9 2005, but this time the 'effect' must be achieved (and dominant) in the foreground.

Technique Challenge: 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 foreground.

Apologies in advance if this is not the correct term for this technique - 'fore bokeh'.

rebelgirl

Canon EOS-30D

11/25/2005 11:14:42 PM · #2

I am game

Beagleboy

Canon EOS-30D

Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4.0 AT-X Pro DX

11/25/2005 11:18:35 PM · #3

Originally posted by macrothing:

Apologies in advance if this is not the correct term for this technique - 'fore bokeh'.

Forkeh(?)

David.C

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

11/25/2005 11:27:25 PM · #4

An excellent suggestion -- one that is not within the norm for technique challenges. :D

David

TooCool

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

11/26/2005 12:45:31 AM · #5

Bumpin' cause I think we need more technique challenges...

ShorterThanJesus

Nikon D300

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

11/26/2005 01:03:17 AM · #6

Are there any well known examples of this? I know that a challenge suggestion ought not to destroy the creative possibilities by posting examples but I honestly can't remember ever seeing this done. Or at least not with the classic bokeh image I have in my mind.

Fujifilm XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 OIS

11/26/2005 07:20:45 AM · #7

No expert on bokeh (foreground or background), but my understanding is that, especially foreground, should be out of focus to the point it becomes almost abstract, pattern like or a blur of color(s). A quick rummage through I found the following which may be close;

I visualize a very creative and complementary use of 'fore bokeh' for this Challenge should it be chosen. Experimenting would play a major role in achieving the best use of this effect on or around the chosen subject(s).

cmeier

11/26/2005 09:30:06 AM · #8

how blurred does the foreground have to be to constitute 'fore bokeh'? would this qualify?

glad2badad

DJI Mavic Air 2

Sears 55mm f/1.4 M42

11/26/2005 09:38:06 AM · #9

Macro - No disrespect, your challenge suggestion sounds like fun, but the majority of your examples don't indicate bokeh to me. They are more or less blurred foregrounds. I know at least one of your examples came from the bokeh challenge, but IMO is also a blurred foreground of a circular pattern rather than true bokeh.

Bokeh generally involves some light and circular points. Here's a definition from an article by Ken Rockwell. Differing amounts of spherical aberration alter how lenses render out-of-focus points of light, and thus their bokeh.

These examples are good examples of bokeh at work. Getting this in the foreground would be a fun challenge. Hope they decide to use it. ;^)

docpjv

Fujifilm X-E1

11/26/2005 09:51:39 AM · #10

how would this do as an example, not of good photog, but as fore-bokeh?

glad2badad

DJI Mavic Air 2

Sears 55mm f/1.4 M42

11/26/2005 10:12:37 AM · #11

It has OOF points of light in the foreground...looks fine from here.

Originally posted by gibun:

how would this do as an example, not of good photog, but as fore-bokeh?

cpanaioti

Canon EOS-40D

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

11/26/2005 11:12:28 AM · #12

Out of focus areas in the foreground are usually a distraction. I think it would be fun to attempt to come up with something where the usual distraction is turned into an attraction.

Message edited by author 2005-11-26 11:13:28.

Tranquil

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro for Canon

11/26/2005 11:35:15 AM · #13

This is a GREAT idea. I love forkeh!

Lee

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

11/26/2005 04:43:21 PM · #14

I said I was no expert in bokeh (nor photography) and that it was a quick scrummage and that some may be close. I am learning here and could not (and did not even attempt to) explain the technical aspects (and there seem to be myriad of them involved in this technique alone) of bokeh. I tried another quick search on the internet and there is of course a wealth of pages on this technique, but it is not easy to a; find good examples of fore bokeh and, b; put any close examples here due to copyrights, etc (just me). I will post a few 'educational' links for those interested.

DPChallenge forum re the Bokeh Challenge held in January 2005, Bokeh - Duh
.....
extract on the meaning taken from that thread;
"PINBOKE - in japanese means DOF
BOKE(bokeh) - means FORGETFULL as we get with old age etc "
and a fairly good (debate it if you wish) fore bokeh example from that thread taken by faidoi:

Some internet 'educational' links;
Paul van Walree

Photo.net Nikkor Bokeh

ClubSNAP
An excerpt from a discussion on Bokeh in general from the above;
"Bokeh is a Japanese word which means "stupid" or "idiotic" or "confused, unclear". So, in photographic sense, it is the "out of focus" areas in the picture. Can be in front of subject or behind the subject, assuming the subject is question is correctly focussed.

I think the serious Japanese photographers were the first to value "good" bokeh."

.....

However the following examples posted in this current thread I consider also very close to my interpretation thus far of 'fore bokeh' (or whatever it is called 'foreground bokeh'/'forkeh'/'cutlery'/'unclear'/'forgetful'/'idiotic', etc);

Also yes the bokeh effect is often known to include the light/flares in the background. I imagine that it is very difficult to 'gain' the dappled light / flare bokeh effect in the foreground, as is often seen in the background bokeh. So anyone who is able to do this would be producing something very unique as far as I know, with my limited knowledge of bokeh and indeed photography. Whether it is 'easier', or even more appealing to have a shallow or deep depth of field when trying to achieve 'fore bokeh', I am unsure, but obviously, a Challenge would/should show a range of both.

Finally, whilst I have achieved some fairly nice background bokeh in my own shots over time, it has usually been serendipitous. Only a few times have I achieved (again by 'accident') a foreground type of effect, which I liked and will continue to experiment with this. Point is, that even with (my) 'point and shoot' it should be able to get me over the line enough to submit something should this unusual Challenge suggestion be chosen. Obviously 'better cameras' will have an advantage, but that will mean I (and the p&s's) will have to try even harder, ie; more challenging (good). It is good to see the interest shown in this suggestion though. edit:typo & fixed link

Message edited by author 2005-11-26 16:53:31.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

11/26/2005 06:05:33 PM · #15

Getting a shallow DOF at all with P&S cameras is hard -- I think this old entry of mine is the closest I've come to what you're proposing.

Message edited by author 2005-11-26 18:05:51.

soup

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

11/26/2005 06:45:48 PM · #16

11/27/2005 12:00:30 AM · #17

I think the above two are good examples, and illustrates a 'variance' in this style. One is the 'on' effect, one is the 'around' effect and one the 'foreground only' effect (maybe there are more?). In my opinion, they'd all be 'acceptable', but the ones that I find most appealing are the 'on' ones - but again, there's potential to use the effect well in many shots. Also, there's the issue of this effect via a macro shot or a long range shot (which is what I was referring to primarily when I used the term 'depth of field', in retrospect, likely incorrect terminology in this context) - but I don't know enough technically to even begin to comment about this.

A couple of 'fair' examples (mediocre quality -p&s) and one 'maybe' of mine which might come close;

Mostly, when I (with my 'p&s') have best achieved this type of effect, it is when I have zoomed in, either on the subject 'through' something, or judging the distance, focussing on something unobstructed a similar distance away, locking the 'focal point' then aiming the lens at chosen subject (manual focus eliminates this for the most part, I assume?), or in the case of a macro, sometimes adjusting the angle/perspective - if that makes sense. That usually results in an almost 'x-ray' or 'see-through' effect (and same thing for many of the examples I have shown in the other posts and seen 'around') of whatever is 'obstructing' the view of the subject.

That is why I termed it as "fore bokeh effect on or around the subject". There is a different 'feel' to a shot when the 'fore bokeh' is almost transparent/translucent, like a thin 'film' over the actual subject/focal point than when the 'fore bokeh' is perhaps 'leading into' the subject, if that makes sense. But either way, leads to a different impact and 'feel' to the shot. Maybe the 'on' or 'around' needs clarification, maybe they're two different styles/techniques, who knows. Just thought it might be a 'challenging Challenge' involving technique and experimentation. edit:wording & removed 2 images

Message edited by author 2005-11-27 07:23:35.

02/20/2007 02:54:34 PM · #18

Still like to see this, although using more creativity than my images I posted as examples. And,

Originally posted by Beagleboy:

Forkeh(?)

might be a good title.