Bokeh is a Japanese word that refers to the subjective visual impression of the out of focus areas of an image. Just because bokeh isn't objectively measurable doesn't mean it's BS, but there's certainly been a lot of BS written about it. What imaging characteristics contribute to beautiful bokeh? What kind of lenses that are most likely to be "bokeh monsters?"? Which vintage and contemporary lenses should bokeh fanatics go for? Just ask me and I'll give you my arrogant but educated opinions-🙂
The Great Bokeh Controversy: Snare or Delusion?
- Thread starter Jason Schneider
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 200
- Views 13K
peterm1
Veteran
I am not sure my hit rate is terrific either. 🤣
I can frequently see an image but I far less often actually get the image that I envisaged especially when shooting with manual focus lenses. One "trick" I often have to keep reminding myself of is to keep looking through the viewfinder when "on the hunt" rather than keeping the camera at my waist. I have found it's far easier to envisage a potential image when doing this. Also, as I often take very "busy" street photos this helps me as there is less delay in seeing and capturing. Too often I see a shot coming together (an interesting subject or composition) and then by the time I have brought the camera to my eye the moment has passed as someone steps into frame or the potential subject suddenly changes position or suddenly does something unaesthetic, or whatever. Having the camera in position helps a lot in that regard but the real benefits is in seeing the shot - I think its due to the way the finder frames the subject that helps in this.
This is one I have always been pleased with - mainly due to its composition. It has Rule of Thirds, Rule of Odds, good subject sharpness and separation, good relationship between the main subject and the position of the other two groups. And it was due to me being prepared by having my eye at the viewfinder. Looking for scenes. A fraction of a second later, the composition had gone. Taken with a Pentax 135mm f3.5 (M version) It's a nothing photo really but it pleases me because I know how fleeting the scene was and I kind of like the result. (Bokeh nothing special though and the small amount of green fringing is annoying - could have dealt with it in post but somehow did not). As usual with me, I have fiddled with it in post so make of it what you will - it's not a "pure" example of a SOOC image that many here seem to prefer. My bad.
Street Composition by Life in Shadows, on Flickr
Last edited:
pgk
Well-known
When the out of focus background within a photograph is a key element of the overall composition it can make or break an image. So the way the lens produces areas outside the depth of field can be important. That said, in my experience (rather more decades that I'd prefer) such images tend to be very few and far between.
mdarnton
Well-known
Honestly, if I'm drawn to looking at the background instead of the subject, something's wrong. Otherwise, meh.
Mos6502
Well-known
Often, the majority of the image is the background.
peterm1
Veteran
I tend to view it a little differently. I like to think of the way in which the main subject interacts with the greater scene, including the background (and its bokeh). In this shot for example (taken with a Nikkor 85mm f2 in rangefinder mount - a Sonnar design) the background is sufficiently blurry to be interesting but helps provide context for the main subject while also being downplayed because it is blurry. While I would argue, still being somewhat interesting in its own right. For me, that is perhaps the best way to use bokeh - it can add to the overall image without dominating.
Lost in the city by Life in Shadows, on FlickrLeon C
Well-known
I was around before the word was banded around like they'd invented the wheel, it makes me gag everytime I hear it, as it sounds like someone can't say the act involving several people properly.....
These days it's just a vehicle for some YT'ers to make themselves sound like they know something, when most of it is Copy/Paste nonsense they read on a Forum.....Ahem!
🤪 😆
These days it's just a vehicle for some YT'ers to make themselves sound like they know something, when most of it is Copy/Paste nonsense they read on a Forum.....Ahem!
🤪 😆
Last edited:
Leon C
Well-known
I tend to view it a little differently. I like to think of the way in which the main subject interacts with the greater scene, including the background (and its bokeh). In this shot for example (taken with a Nikkor 85mm f2 in rangefinder mount - a Sonnar design) the background is sufficiently blurry to be interesting but helps provide context for the main subject while also being downplayed because it is blurry. While I would argue, still being somewhat interesting in its own right. For me, that is perhaps the best way to use bokeh - it can add to the overall image without dominating.
It can depend on who's looking at the picture, the background in this, for me personally, is more interesting than the infocus people and I would cut it in half. 😉
38Deardorff
Well-known
LC, I agree with you. A photographer friend of mine & I had a conversation, having just walked out of the Fondation HC Bresson in Paris, we agreed that in the days of Doisneau & Bresson there were less people in the streets and made for more interesting photos. People looking at cell phones is common and photographically uninteresting to me.....no matter how well framed or composed, & a fair number of those images get posted here.
This on the other hand (M Riboud, Moscow 1962)
Last edited:
boojum
Ignoble Miscreant
OK, we are approaching what I think is the nubbin: that the out-of-focus or bokeh is an embellishment or an enhancement to the scene but not the scene itself. It should be an addition not a subtraction or distraction, IMNSHO. Dixi! LOL
boojum
Ignoble Miscreant
OK, this is one of the rare instances when I got an OK pic, in my vain opinion, with the background/bokeh enhancing but not overpowering the image. Just blooming Rhodies on an M9 with the CV 35mm Nokton II.
peterm1
Veteran
I would certainly crop it like this (below). In fact now that I think about it I can't recall why I did not do so in the beginning as I think it improves the shot - I have a vague recall of debating such a crop in my mind, and rejecting it but cannot now recall why I arrived at that conclusion.
However, if you mean crop out the main subject(s) leaving only blur, I would personally not do that as to my way of thinking it would make the image a pointless exhibition of some interesting but otherwise, err, well pointless - as I said, blur. I think an image needs a definitive subject of some sort. Without a clear subject it would just become yet another bokeh photo.
What I might also do had I the chance to retake it, would be to stop the lens down a little - maybe from f2 (wide open) to f4 so there is a more graduated shift from sharp to out of focus which would connect the subject to the background while still retaining enough bokeh for the purpose of the image.
38Deardorff
Well-known
Peter, I do like the OF effect of that particular lens!
boojum
Ignoble Miscreant
Peter, I like it at f/2.0 and cropped. C'est finis. You have brought it to completion.
peterm1
Veteran
Thank you Boojum. Yes it does improve it. Oh well, we live and learn. 😀
peterm1
Veteran
I have ended up buying a few Nikkor rangefinder lenses over recent years and they are all very nice in their own way. So far, I also have the Nikkor 50mm f1.4, a 105mm f2.5 (same Sonnar formula as later early F mount 105mm's), and 3 copies of the 135mm f3.5. Gorgeous lenses. I accidentally bought two chrome ones (don't ask but essentially an eBay confusion which was my fault) and deliberately bought a later black and chrome 135mm to see if there was any imaging difference - there wasn't. The 105mm has excellent bokeh but I must say I have not really tested the 135mms for this characteristic. I must do so. But in some respects, I would go so far as to say that the 85mm used for this shot is the best.
Leon C
Well-known
Harry the K
Well-known
There´s also the case of Petzval bokeh. The Bokeh is prominent but supports the image instead of distracting.
ellisson
Well-known
I prefer the un-cropped version because it includes the smiling woman on her mobile phone in a pleasant(?) conversation, clearly in a different "place" than the woman looking intently at her cell phone screen (for information?). It tells/suggests more of a story with the two different expressions. Telling a story is a strong feature, aside from bokeh.
mdarnton
Well-known
This idea doesn't work for my personal photography. Early on I worked for an editor who would have taken that particular 5-column photo of yours and turned it into a one-column with his scissors, two if he was feeling generous, so I learned to make photos where you just could NOT clip an arbitrary but situationally-useful one column percentage width off without totally ruining the photo. 🙂 That said, I find the chattery character of the background to be a negative component there, not a positive--it's just the kind of photo I was thinking of when I made the comment. Not trying to be mean at all, and I understand personal taste, but that's my personal taste.
I tend to view it a little differently. I like to think of the way in which the main subject interacts with the greater scene, including the background (and its bokeh). In this shot for example (taken with a Nikkor 85mm f2 in rangefinder mount - a Sonnar design) the background is sufficiently blurry to be interesting but helps provide context for the main subject while also being downplayed because it is blurry. While I would argue, still being somewhat interesting in its own right. For me, that is perhaps the best way to use bokeh - it can add to the overall image without dominating.
ellisson
Well-known
Personal taste is obviously subjective, but I'm fairly sure this photo was not meant for a newspaper, so that medium is not relevant here. The background of numerous people going about their business is a strength of this photo. If you look at an image from the viewpoint of telling a story, the background adds the busy setting and context that shows the city environment in which the main subject is somehow navigating. This is not news media, this is art.