DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> Bokeh A technique
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 44 of 44, (reverse)
AuthorThread
11/14/2007 10:58:37 AM · #26
Originally posted by AVP:

Bokeh is the rendering of out of focus areas in a picture, usually to enhance it. Thus foreground bokeh is the use and rendering of oof foreground to enhance the picture. In this round there are very few captures actually following this. Moreover, many of them use both. Since the topic is foreground, Ive deducted points when background bokeh was an important element of the picture.

Hmmm....

Okay, first, let me say that I'd like to open a line of conversation here that is meant to gain information and knowledge, I do not mean to be either judgemental or critical, I just want to know how you arrived at something.

My mention of a comment in my last post is based on a comment you left.

I noticed that you don't have a ton of challenge and portfolio experience, and your comments to votes ratio is extremely low.

Yet you commented, and your comment to me was in the vein of advising me in the technique of bokeh, and that's fine, I appreciate it that you took the time to make a comment and a suggestion, thanks.

Let me state at this point that I don't entirely think you were off base, maybe a little LOL, but what I'm curious about is why this subject provokes so many to have an opinion.

I'm sort of curious with your comment history as to what it is about this challenge that inspires you to comment?

I hope I'm just mistaking a renwed interest in commenting, and I certainly don't want to chase anyone away who's commenting at any level, I'm just wondering if it's the Bokeh.

As this definition seems to me to be all over the place, what is it about Bokeh that's so damn controversial??????

It really seems to me to be pretty simple.....an OOF area of the image that is distinct and enhances it. And that's what you stated above. I don't know what you left for a vote, that's immaterial and I don't have, or care about, the spreadsheet.

The circles part of it, though typical, shouldn't define it, IMO, and from your definition, I'd say that you basically believe that.

So what are the chances of actually arriving at a concensus of what Bokeh means?
11/14/2007 11:00:31 AM · #27
Originally posted by NikonJeb:


So what are the chances of actually arriving at a concensus of what Bokeh means?


1 in 24,213,664,134,789,321,121,432,889,131,14,779,054,101
11/14/2007 11:12:04 AM · #28
Lol good call....

Originally posted by routerguy666:

Originally posted by NikonJeb:


So what are the chances of actually arriving at a concensus of what Bokeh means?


1 in 24,213,664,134,789,321,121,432,889,131,14,779,054,101
11/14/2007 11:13:34 AM · #29
If BoKeh challenges are good for something it's to see how little people understand the concept of BoKeh.

*Pulls hair out and shakes head while thanking god I did not enter*
11/14/2007 11:16:42 AM · #30
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

If BoKeh challenges are good for something it's to see how little people understand the concept of BoKeh.

*Pulls hair out and shakes head while thanking god I did not enter*


Same here. Choose your battles.

Of course I thought I had a shot in for Topless only to discover I must have unsubmitted it at some point during the week.

11/14/2007 11:19:06 AM · #31
Originally posted by NikonJeb:

It really seems to me to be pretty simple.....an OOF area of the image that is distinct and enhances it. And that's what you stated above. I don't know what you left for a vote, that's immaterial and I don't have, or care about, the spreadsheet.

The circles part of it, though typical, shouldn't define it, IMO, and from your definition, I'd say that you basically believe that.


Im not sure what you are on about, but judging from your text Id say we agree with each other. The circles thing is a red herring though, it doesnt have to be highlights, circular or donut shape to be bokeh, it can though.

I comment and vote as I enter challenges, Im sure you do the same? I do a 100% vote on all entries and try to leave 20% comments, I hope others do the same.

Message edited by author 2007-11-14 11:20:54.
11/14/2007 11:24:31 AM · #32
Originally posted by jasonlprice:

I haven't looked at the entries yet, but I have a feeling I will score this one with rose colored glasses just knowing the difficulty in creating good foreground bokeh.


What he said. I always figure that if I had a hard time other people did, too.

Rose-colored glasses firmly in place here. Better go vote before they slip too far down my nose!
11/14/2007 11:26:32 AM · #33
Oh my god, my entry's bokeh is so strong that people think it's fake. So much for all my effort.
11/14/2007 11:58:37 AM · #34
Originally posted by jasonlprice:

I haven't looked at the entries yet, but I have a feeling I will score this one with rose colored glasses just knowing the difficulty in creating good foreground bokeh.

Originally posted by MaryO:

What he said. I always figure that if I had a hard time other people did, too.

Rose-colored glasses firmly in place here. Better go vote before they slip too far down my nose!

I had such a bear of a time with this, I went out and bought a new pair of rose-colored, 24 carat gold rimmed glasses!......8>)
11/14/2007 12:15:38 PM · #35
There's a legitimate difference of opinion on how to define "bokeh". The old-school, hardcore people say it is ONLY the rendition of severely out-of-focus, specular highlights. The looser, more modern definition is "the quality of the OOF areas in an image".

I see no reason to punish people with my voting for following the more current definition, and I haven't.

But for me, for an image to nail the challenge the foreground bokeh has to be reasonably pronounced and must constitute a dynamic component of, an enhancement of, the image.

I am flabbergasted that anyone would deduct points fore the presence of BACKGROUND bokeh, assuming foreground bokeh is also present and doing its job. I think that's insane, frankly. Really limiting.

In any case, a surprising number of the entries don['t seem to have ANY OOF foreground working as a significant part of the composition... That surprises me.

R.
11/14/2007 12:58:18 PM · #36
Originally posted by Bear_Music:


I am flabbergasted that anyone would deduct points fore the presence of BACKGROUND bokeh, assuming foreground bokeh is also present and doing its job. I think that's insane, frankly. Really limiting.


Not sure if you are refering to me, but I think its quite clear that if the topic specifically mentions FOREground bokeh (Create a photo in which bokeh is effectively used, but the bokeh effect should be in the foreground of the image.), than that needs to be clearly portrayed and be an important part of the picture. There are a lot of entries with beautiful background bokeh and very small foreground ones, those I would argue dont meet the topic, as they could have also been entered into a general bokeh topic. Thus I voted by deducting points when background bokeh was an important element of the picture, more so than foreground bokeh. I consider that fair to all who tried to actually create foreground bokeh and use it in some way in their shot.
11/14/2007 01:07:35 PM · #37
oh boy, another argument over Bokeh!! I can hardly wait until we all come to a unanimous decision and solve this great mystery once and for all....wake me when that happens;)
11/14/2007 01:10:49 PM · #38
Originally posted by jschro:

oh boy, another argument over Bokeh!! I can hardly wait until we all come to a unanimous decision and solve this great mystery once and for all....wake me when that happens;)


We'll assign someone to put possies on your plot when that happens. :P Sub-ject-ive...(giggles)

Message edited by author 2007-11-14 13:11:20.
11/14/2007 01:19:23 PM · #39
Originally posted by AVP:

Originally posted by Bear_Music:


I am flabbergasted that anyone would deduct points fore the presence of BACKGROUND bokeh, assuming foreground bokeh is also present and doing its job. I think that's insane, frankly. Really limiting.


Not sure if you are refering to me, but I think its quite clear that if the topic specifically mentions FOREground bokeh (Create a photo in which bokeh is effectively used, but the bokeh effect should be in the foreground of the image.), than that needs to be clearly portrayed and be an important part of the picture. There are a lot of entries with beautiful background bokeh and very small foreground ones, those I would argue dont meet the topic, as they could have also been entered into a general bokeh topic. Thus I voted by deducting points when background bokeh was an important element of the picture, more so than foreground bokeh. I consider that fair to all who tried to actually create foreground bokeh and use it in some way in their shot.


As I said, "assuming foreground bokeh is also present and doing its job". Your original post said only that you were deducting for BG bokeh. ("Moreover, many of them use both. Since the topic is foreground, I've deducted points when background bokeh was an important element of the picture.") I agree with your position as you have stated it in this post, in the part I have bolded.

Peace :-)

R.

Message edited by author 2007-11-14 13:21:47.
11/14/2007 01:20:26 PM · #40
You have rated 128 of 170 images (75%) in this challenge.
You have commented on 32 images (19%) in this challenge.

Sounds like Jeb's glasses are even nicer than mine so he should be a REALLY easy grader on this challenge!
11/14/2007 01:26:43 PM · #41
Originally posted by jschro:

oh boy, another argument over Bokeh!! I can hardly wait until we all come to a unanimous decision and solve this great mystery once and for all....wake me when that happens;)


I noted your wink, but why are informative discussions referred to as argumentive?? Seems to be the case a lot of the time.
This is a learning site. All opinions should be heard.
11/14/2007 05:51:55 PM · #42
Challenge Details.
Create a photo in which bokeh is effectively used, but the bokeh effect should be in the foreground of the image

This is my example of how I believe Foreground Bokeh should be interpreted. There has to be a quality in the photo to determine the difference between 'Shallow depth of field' and 'Bokeh', and to me this is light and shadow with the background in focus, if this is not present then I believe the photo is just SDOF.

[thumb]613288[/thumb]

Even I missed this true element in my entry.

Message edited by author 2007-11-14 17:54:03.
11/14/2007 07:04:51 PM · #43
Originally posted by hywind:

This is my example ...

Well, I certainly can't wait to discuss my entry with you after the challenge is over. :-) Your comment was pleasant, no problem there, but I really think your definition is bordering on extreme. You have to look pretty hard to find bg bokeh in mine, yet it seems to be quite evident according to your definition for this challenge.

To each their own. I really have no hard feelings toward you personally, but since you seem to be quite vocal in the forums on "your" definition of what meets the challenge I have to say that Robert ( Bear_Music) is substantially closer to what most seem to be indicating is foreground bokeh (based on current score and comments).

edit - typo.

Message edited by author 2007-11-14 19:05:18.
11/14/2007 07:51:29 PM · #44
Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by hywind:

This is my example ...

Well, I certainly can't wait to discuss my entry with you after the challenge is over. :-) Your comment was pleasant, no problem there, but I really think your definition is bordering on extreme. You have to look pretty hard to find bg bokeh in mine, yet it seems to be quite evident according to your definition for this challenge.

To each their own. I really have no hard feelings toward you personally, but since you seem to be quite vocal in the forums on "your" definition of what meets the challenge I have to say that Robert ( Bear_Music) is substantially closer to what most seem to be indicating is foreground bokeh (based on current score and comments).

edit - typo.


yes each to his own, experience has said in the many comments I have recieved over the years stick to the challenge details, I also notice that when challenges come along there is a big discussion on what is ment by the details, then when the entries go in and a thread is opened about the challenge, many seem to attack the ideas and change the theme of the challenge to suit the present mood, I don't wish to sound argumentative, just conveying my thoughts on the challenge and accept all that is said.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 09:35:44 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 09:35:44 AM EDT.