What the heck really IS Bokeh????

Pentax D-FA* 70-200mm f/2.8 ED DC AW

12/25/2008 02:29:48 AM · #1

I've noticed that this whole concept/definition is......shall we say, somewhat elusive.

I'd really love to have a general discussion so that I have a good working DP Challenge definition for Bokeh.

I would love to have input, and let's face it, this thread will be USELESS without pictures! LOL!!!

To me, this is a typical, traditional example of Bokeh.....I realize this isn't the most terrific example photographically.....

[thumb]570748[/thumb]

But my definition as it has developed over time leads me to believe that this is a respectable example as well.

[thumb]749778[/thumb]

And I am starting to get a little muddy on the real difference between shallow DOF, nicely done, and Bokeh.

I'd offer these images for review/dissection/discussion....

[thumb]584309[/thumb]    [thumb]727426[/thumb]

I really like my Iced Thistles as a more unconventional type of Bokeh.

What say you?

bspurgeon

Fujifilm x100

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

12/25/2008 02:40:54 AM · #2

You seem to have it down, although the yellow flower image is not ideal from my stand point. Great bokeh for me includes points of light, like your first image, or a creamy smooth background. The background in the yellow rose is too defined for my taste when discussing bokeh. I love your Iced Thistles image, great example in my opinion. My entry in the bokeh challenge reflected my concept of bokeh (IMO of course!).

K3Master

Pentax K-3

12/25/2008 02:44:33 AM · #3

Good bokeh works to enhance your main subject, which I think far too many entries in the latest challenge were missing.

Pentax D-FA* 70-200mm f/2.8 ED DC AW

12/25/2008 02:45:12 AM · #4

I found this rummaging in my portfolio for Bokeh, too....I like the way that the background really enhances the hugeness of the Hibiscus blossom.

[thumb]561146[/thumb]

K3Master

Pentax K-3

12/25/2008 02:48:55 AM · #5

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

I found this rummaging in my portfolio for Bokeh, too....I like the way that the background really enhances the hugeness of the Hibiscus blossom.

[thumb]561146[/thumb]

I find the background more distracting than enhancing myself. Too much contrast, far too busy. It's a good "cataloging" type of shot, but there's really not much more there. However, now we're really off the subject aren't we?

Bokeh is one of those things that is really sort of difficult to define in hard terms. For me, it's one of those 'you know it when you see it' kind of things.

12/25/2008 02:50:29 AM · #6

Originally posted by bspurgeon:

Yes, this is what I'd consider a terrific example.....with the accompanying Top 10 placing to validate that......8>).

Your comment about the black section is off to me......since the florets are so pronounced, and with such exceptional detail, I think it actually enhances, rather than detracts from the image.

Pentax D-FA* 70-200mm f/2.8 ED DC AW

12/25/2008 02:54:48 AM · #7

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

I found this rummaging in my portfolio for Bokeh, too....I like the way that the background really enhances the hugeness of the Hibiscus blossom.

[thumb]561146[/thumb]

Originally posted by K10DGuy:

Okay, what does "cataloging" mean?

Yeah.....I know what you mean by the "know it when you see it" idea, but I also get the distinct impression that the community at large here seems to be all over th map on it......hence my interest in possibly trying to nail it down.

Kind of like herding cats, though, I'm afraid.......8>)

K3Master

Pentax K-3

12/25/2008 03:01:32 AM · #8

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I found this rummaging in my portfolio for Bokeh, too....I like the way that the background really enhances the hugeness of the Hibiscus blossom.

[thumb]561146[/thumb]

Originally posted by K10DGuy:
I find the background more distracting than enhancing myself. Too much contrast, far too busy. It's a good "cataloging" type of shot, but there's really not much more there. However, now we're really off the subject aren't we?

Bokeh is one of those things that is really sort of difficult to define in hard terms. For me, it's one of those 'you know it when you see it' kind of things.

Okay, what does "cataloging" mean?

Yeah.....I know what you mean by the "know it when you see it" idea, but I also get the distinct impression that the community at large here seems to be all over th map on it......hence my interest in possibly trying to nail it down.

Kind of like herding cats, though, I'm afraid.......8>)

'Cataloging' meaning it's a nice shot for a Botany Encylopedia :)

12/25/2008 03:05:16 AM · #9

Originally posted by K10DGuy:

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I found this rummaging in my portfolio for Bokeh, too....I like the way that the background really enhances the hugeness of the Hibiscus blossom.

[thumb]561146[/thumb]

Originally posted by K10DGuy:
I find the background more distracting than enhancing myself. Too much contrast, far too busy. It's a good "cataloging" type of shot, but there's really not much more there. However, now we're really off the subject aren't we?

Bokeh is one of those things that is really sort of difficult to define in hard terms. For me, it's one of those 'you know it when you see it' kind of things.

Okay, what does "cataloging" mean?

Yeah.....I know what you mean by the "know it when you see it" idea, but I also get the distinct impression that the community at large here seems to be all over th map on it......hence my interest in possibly trying to nail it down.

Kind of like herding cats, though, I'm afraid.......8>)

'Cataloging' meaning it's a nice shot for a Botany Encylopedia :)

Oh.....oh....oh.....

Wait, let me see if I'm bleeding!!!

Oh, that's COLD!!!!......8>)

Merry Christmas, Ed!

bspurgeon

Fujifilm x100

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

12/25/2008 03:41:25 AM · #10

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

I found this rummaging in my portfolio for Bokeh, too....I like the way that the background really enhances the hugeness of the Hibiscus blossom.

[thumb]561146[/thumb]

I still think the background in this image is too defined for this discussion, but I do like the sense of scale that the trees provide. I know the flower should be small, but it's huge!

Azrifel

Nikon Coolpix P340

12/25/2008 05:27:37 AM · #11

Bokeh is the word used to comment on the quality of a lens on how it renders the out of focus part of a picture. The way it is used at DPC is nonsense. It is not a photographical concept. It is simply a word.

12/25/2008 06:32:18 AM · #12

Originally posted by Azrifel:

Okay, then explain it, and be constructive in your commentary.

The whole purpose of this thread is to attempt to lessen the confusion and controversy.

Stating that nobody knows what it means is no help whatsoever.

mpeters

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

12/25/2008 06:55:04 AM · #13

Even if Bokeh is not a photographic concept, isn't it illustrated in a photo to one degree or another? I don't know how to define the concept, but good bokeh just 'feels' right.

TrollMan

Fujifilm X-T4

Fujifilm XF 35mm f/1.4

12/25/2008 07:24:29 AM · #14

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Okay, then explain it, and be constructive in your commentary.

I think he explained it very well here. I can't think of a better way to say it:

Originally posted by Azrifel:

Bokeh is the word used to comment on the quality of a lens on how it renders the out of focus part of a picture.

And then of course, it depends on what type of bokeh feels appropriate to the viewer for a particular image and what is pleasing to your eye :o)

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

12/25/2008 07:55:53 AM · #15

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Okay, then explain it, and be constructive in your commentary.

Originally posted by TrollMan:

I think he explained it very well here. I can't think of a better way to say it:

Originally posted by Azrifel:

Bokeh is the word used to comment on the quality of a lens on how it renders the out of focus part of a picture.

Originally posted by TrollMan:

And then of course, it depends on what type of bokeh feels appropriate to the viewer for a particular image and what is pleasing to your eye :o)

Well, the SPECIFICS of that quality is what we're looking for, is it not?

Isn't that the circles, pattern, particular depth, whatever?

If it is in fact a "feel", then it cannot be defined, so then Bokeh will be many different things to different people and the constant "that isn't 'real' Bokeh" will kind of be negated.

I just find it frustrating to hear the constant back and forth if it's not going to result in any kind of reasonable conclusion.

I keep hearing, "This or that is NOT Bokeh.".....okay, fine.....what is?

Hence my suggestion that those who are so adamant in their statement that the community doesn't have the concept give us some working examples.

Can't put it into words?

Okay....give us image examples that will help us understand the concept.

Message edited by author 2008-12-25 08:00:41.

Panks

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

12/25/2008 08:03:42 AM · #16

In the little time that I have spent here, I have never seen a challenge being discussed so much ... long after it has been done and dusted ;) .. Next time we have the bokeh challenge .. can we rename it too .. pandora's bokeh ;)

vencap

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS USM

12/25/2008 09:04:47 AM · #17

To me BOKEH is the dreamy smooth background that adds to the effect of the in-focus subject. It is that 'professional' look that we would see in published photos when we first started doing photography. It can't be achieved with a typical consumer camera. It usually takes a longer lens. Here are a couple of examples

Narrow DOF however, shows the background distinct but blurred. This also should enhance the subject in the foreground.

But again, just my opinion and I'm a relative newbie to photography and plenty of DNMCs, so I'm not familiar with a lot of terms!

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

12/25/2008 09:48:16 AM · #18

What about this?

[thumb]553965[/thumb]

snaffles

Nikon D7100

12/25/2008 09:56:54 AM · #19

I had a camera store employee gush over the bokeh in the bg here:

when I showed it to him in-camera. *shrugs* guess it's bokeh-ish.

cpanaioti

Canon EOS-40D

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

12/25/2008 09:59:44 AM · #20

Originally posted by snaffles:

I had a camera store employee gush over the bokeh in the bg here: when I showed it to him in-camera. *shrugs* guess it's bokeh-ish.

Yup. Gotta love that background.

jhomrighaus

Nikon D5300

Sigma 18-300mm f3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM

12/25/2008 10:07:13 AM · #21

Originally posted by snaffles:

I had a camera store employee gush over the bokeh in the bg here: when I showed it to him in-camera. *shrugs* guess it's bokeh-ish.

I think what makes this great Bokeh is that it really sets the squirel in his element in a very complimentary way and lends a lot of scale to the image, compared to say the exact same shot set against the backdrop of another large tree.

jhomrighaus

Nikon D5300

Sigma 18-300mm f3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM

12/25/2008 10:09:01 AM · #22

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

What about this?

[thumb]553965[/thumb]

This is a nice shot with a very smooth background, while this is bokeh of high quality, I thinks its kind of flat for my personal taste.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

12/25/2008 10:14:44 AM · #23

Originally posted by snaffles:

I had a camera store employee gush over the bokeh in the bg here: when I showed it to him in-camera. *shrugs* guess it's bokeh-ish.

Originally posted by jhomrighaus:

I nominate this image as an "Official DPC Bokeh" example!.......8>)

Mick

Canon EOS-5D

12/25/2008 10:16:15 AM · #24

Bokeh = out-of-focus specular highlights

There were some good examples of bokeh in the recent challenge. Unfortunately, none of them won a ribbon. In my opinion, of the three ribbon winners, only roz's "summer rain" exhibits any bokeh at all. The other two, while wonderful photos in their own right, are not especially good examples of bokeh.

Of course, all of this is simply my opinion. YMMV.

1. Bokeh need not be creamy, dreamy, smooth, or silky.
2. Bokeh is not always a good thing. It can actually ruin a photo.
3. Bokeh is not "all the blurry parts of a photo."

If you disagree with any of the above, then fine. You're an idiot, but it's okay. :D

Message edited by author 2008-12-25 10:26:12.