Can I see "bad" bokeh...
- Thread starter Carterofmars
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 61
- Views 10K
Lax Jought
Well-known
You could get the world's best wedding photographers to do an entire wedding with a lens with the worst bokeh, and the bride and groom would still be over the moon with the photos and wouldn't have a clue that the bokeh was supposed to be ugly.
I agree. It's a photo nerd concern only.
anjoca76
Well-known
If many of these shots weren't posted in a thread called bad bokeh, I doubt I'd think the bokeh was all that bad, to be honest.
Sometimes I don't like the bokeh that my Summicron-C 40/2 renders, but it's not so bad as to detract from the images.
Sometimes I don't like the bokeh that my Summicron-C 40/2 renders, but it's not so bad as to detract from the images.
sleepyhead
Well-known
I'm not so sure.
Below are some pictures that are tacked to the wall in my office. One of my colleagues recently noticed them and commented that "the photos look old fashioned". That made me curious and I asked why he thought that. He pointed out the dress that the youngest girl is wearing (which is indeed vintage 1970s Swedish), and "the backgrounds of the pictures". He pointed in particular to the somewhat swirly bokeh in the same picture of the youngest girl. I then asked if he was interested in photography (he does not know that it's my hobby), and he said "not particularly".
So I think that some "normal" non-nerdy people can also pick up on bokeh. But perhaps they don't judge it as "good" or "bad" or "swirly" or "jittery", etc. but rather by the feeling or "vibe" it evokes. Kinda in an integrated sensory way, if that makes any sense...
By the way, the photos were taken wihh a Zeiss Super Ikonta B.
brbo
Well-known
I love this kind of "bad" bokeh. I even considered getting a film EOS to use EF 50/1.8 on it. I can't get my FD 50/1.8 to produce bokeh this "ugly"...
Eventually I got a Canon 35/2 ltm, that can also do swirls...
sis 'n' bro by boachi, on Flickr
. . by boachi, on Flickr
More Bad Bokeh
Eventually I got a Canon 35/2 ltm, that can also do swirls...
sis 'n' bro by boachi, on Flickr
. . by boachi, on Flickr
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
Some of us, who have been taking photographs for far too long had never heard of it until recently. And - gasp - some of us think it's been thought up by the PR people to sell lenses or else frighten people into buying something they don't really need. Like face recognition which I've been doing since a day or so after I was born but which it seems I can't do now without some weird gizmo built into the camera. (How I managed before escapes me at the moment but I expect I'll be told.)
Anyway, what they like is "good" and what they don't like is "bad" and often they are the same; you see it all depends on what you like...
Regards, David
Some of us, who have been taking photographs for far too long had never heard of it until recently. And - gasp - some of us think it's been thought up by the PR people to sell lenses or else frighten people into buying something they don't really need. Like face recognition which I've been doing since a day or so after I was born but which it seems I can't do now without some weird gizmo built into the camera. (How I managed before escapes me at the moment but I expect I'll be told.)
Anyway, what they like is "good" and what they don't like is "bad" and often they are the same; you see it all depends on what you like...
Regards, David
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Non photographers do not think about bokeh.
But when they see a picture with a very distracting background because of the bokeh, they may not like it, while at the same time won't be able to pinpoint the reason why.
Better being a photo nerd than a food critic. Ba-da-boom!! 😀
That's a bit different.
The subjects matter more in this case. Show them photos with subjects that are detached from them, and their response may be different.
But having said that, once I took a family portrait with a lens that has a swirly bokeh, and when viewing the print, the lady who was in the picture (not a photographer) pointed to the background and said: Is that supposed to look like that?
Gregoyle
Well-known
I'm not so sure.
Below are some pictures that are tacked to the wall in my office. ...
By the way, the photos were taken wihh a Zeiss Super Ikonta B.
Beautiful pictures.
The other thing that makes them look "old fashioned" to me is the color. I can't point to a specific cast, but it definitely looks like a film color scheme. I will go out on a limb and guess Kodak Gold?
If you told me you shot the pictures with a digital camera I would assume you had used VSCO Film or another plugin to get the "film-like" look.
-Greg
Gregoyle
Well-known
I love this kind of "bad" bokeh. I even considered getting a film EOS to use EF 50/1.8 on it. I can't get my FD 50/1.8 to produce bokeh this "ugly"...
Eventually I got a Canon 35/2 ltm, that can also do swirls...
sis 'n' bro by boachi, on Flickr
. . by boachi, on Flickr
In the black and white photo at the bottom, I think the "bad" bokeh actually adds to the picture. The swirled highlights almost act as a sort of halo.
Maybe it's just the talent of the photographers in this thread, or maybe bokeh is really as overrated as all that, but I haven't seen any pictures here where the bokeh has ruined the picture. Although the hexagonal swirls might not work if you don't ingeniously shoot a hexagonal pipe 🙂.
-Greg
jordanatkins
Established
I wouldn't consider the photograph of the man with the cig in his mouth (page 1) an example of bad bokeh. Am I alone on this?
Gregoyle
Well-known
I think the background is far enough out of focus in that photo that the bokeh doesn't get too busy, but if you look in the lower left you can see some hexagonal highlights. At smaller apertures or when the background is closer that would be undesirable and make the background take away from the subject.
I agree with you that it is barely noticeable in that picture; I had to search to see why Scott posted it.
-Greg
jordanatkins
Established
Hexagonal highlights don't bother me, as long as there's not too many of them, (e.g. shooting through a tree with the sun behind, although that looks bad with any lens).
Now this is some bad bokeh, one of the worst I've seen:
Now this is some bad bokeh, one of the worst I've seen:
thompsonks
Well-known
While the background is certainly a mess, is it really bad bokeh in terms of lens behavior?
Landshark
Well-known
Something I read lately.
"If you have to analyze the picture, you're missing the point"
"If you have to analyze the picture, you're missing the point"
dberger
Established
Sorry, while that quotation might sound "yeah man, real deep," it's also simply ridiculous.
Cheers,
David
Lax Jought
Well-known
I understand where it's coming from though.
It's like going to a jazz gig to see Wynton Marsalis play and then criticising him for using a particular trumpet make/brand because it produces a tone that you don't like. Just enjoy the gig!
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
The trouble is that for some people analysis is the whole point. As the man said; those that can, do; those that can't, criticise...
Regards, David
The trouble is that for some people analysis is the whole point. As the man said; those that can, do; those that can't, criticise...
Regards, David
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Same lens. Same day.
That's pretty naughty. And like some people with PADD (Photographic Attention Deficit Disorder) would say, that girl is distracting 😉
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
🙂
Downright spooky bokeh. Exorcism might be called for here.