Boke(h)y Hokey Pokey

[dcsang]

Ok.. maybe it's me but, can someone explain to me why; if bokeh is harsh to one person it must therefore be harsh to all people?

I've been having a "discussion" on another board regarding good/bad bokeh and that, I believe, the quality of bokeh is, or can be, subjective in nature.

Can anyone prove to me that bokeh is NOT subjective in nature?

curious about this bokey hokey pokey,
Dave

 

[Goodyear]

Of course it is.

 

[squeaky_clean]

I don't see how it could be anything but subjective...?

 

[dnk512]

It can not be measured, yet. So it is subjective. However, like all subjective things, there are kinds that the vast majority will agree to mark as bad. I think the fuzy issues start with the less bad bokeh or the not so great bokeh. Some may like some may not. Same thing with a 'good' photogaph. With some, most of us agree as good or bad. With others most of us dissagree.

 

[Todd.Hanz]

I tend to dislike "swirly" bokeh, it makes me feel like I do when drinking my favorite fine wine, Mad Dog 20/20 🙂.

Todd

 

[Flyfisher Tom]

when words such as "beautiful" and "ugly" are applied as qualifiers in discussing bokeh, it is subjective

 

[VinceC]

I think there are some accepted patterns of "harsh" bokeh. Most people consider well-defined but doubled out-of-focus lines to be harsh and smooth blurred out-of-focus lines to be soft and pleasing.

 

[clarence]

It's a matter of what factors you're evaluating: For example, the presence of double images is not a subjective observation.

I suppose 'harsh bokeh' refers to the edge characteristics of the out of focus portions of the image. The terminology in this particular field is not clearly defined, and I think it is because lens manufacturers don't advertise based on the bokeh characteristics of their products.

Clarence

 

[back alley]

...I've been having a "discussion" on another board...


WHAT!?

 

[Benjamin Marks]

I tend to dislike "swirly" bokeh, it makes me feel like I do when drinking my favorite fine wine, Mad Dog 20/20 🙂.

Todd

And this is a bad thing? 😛

 

[dcsang]

...I've been having a "discussion" on another board...


WHAT!?

heh.. shush..
I'm just trying to confirm my sanity that's all. 😀

My point of view was that it is, in fact, a subjective quality because we cannot measure it but we can say that "hmm.. I agree that really harsh bokeh sucks.. yet the sort of 'in between' bokeh ; the bokeh that is not harsh but at the same time not creamy smooth may be considered pleasing by some and vile by others"

The mere fact, as Tom suggested above, that we are saying something like this makes it subjective. It is akin to figure skating judging 😀 imho.

As for the "other board" .. the comments that bokeh is NOT subjective were made by a pro photographer.. a published one at that... so I'm just trying to understand if I am, indeed, incorrect in my understanding.

Dave

 

[telenous]

Hi Dave,

Very interesting question. In my view there are both subjective and objective aspects in bokeh. To give an example: Background blur can have (objective) characteristics on which we can all agree they are there, for instance double lines (I believe there is a japanese word for that). That's one of the objective bits of bokeh. Whether this is actually pleasing or not, is surely a matter of preference, and hence subjective. So, it seems to me, bokeh has objective characteristics to which different people react sometimes differently. All in all I tend to agree with you, because I think it is very difficult to come down with a sort of convention on what counts as harsh bokeh and what not.

 

[trittium]

It is good if it enhances the subject, and bad if it distracts. People who shoot primarily one subject matter may think a lens has bad bokeh because it primarily detracts from there favorite material. I am sure people will disagree with me, but it is extremely subjective.

 

[dnk512]

The biggest problem with evaluating a lens' bokeh is that it is so variable across its range of focus and aperture and type of background and light. But, for a given image, I will strongly agree with the first sentence of TRITTIUM above.

 

[RML]

As for the "other board" .. the comments that bokeh is NOT subjective were made by a pro photographer.. a published one at that... so I'm just trying to understand if I am, indeed, incorrect in my understanding.

A published pro? And that makes him an expert on bokeh? I don't think so.

 

[Trius]

Dave: It's gotta be subjective because when I posted a link to some Zeiss FM bokeh shots people slagged me unmercifully. Since I liked it, they are either wrong or it's subjective! 😀

 

[back alley]

i think bokeh is a waste of conversation.

 

[vincentbenoit]

Everything about photography is subjective.
Heck, some people even like colour pictures! 😉

Vincent

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

"Can anyone prove to me that bokeh is NOT subjective in nature?"

hmm...

If you like Dunkin' Donuts and somebody else doesn't like Dunkin' Donuts... must everybody like Dunkin' Donuts or must everybody hate Dunkin' Donuts?

Same logic, methinks.

 

[back alley]

i like dunkin donuts

i could care less about bokeh