the bokeh boys have won!!

it's time to put my foot down, I like bokeh and lots of it ;)
6328930049_24964d5a0a_z.jpg


6271020692_9ec6d361e3_z.jpg


5584151806_5040ce96c4_z.jpg


3780121322_411b94a0d9_o.jpg


Todd
 
Bokeh kills!
That's right, for every bokeh, some little detail had to die.
So please, for the sake of all the little details,
"JUST SAY NO WAY TO BOKEH."
file-63.jpg
 
Please join me, brothers and sisters, in a unified stand against Bokeh and the harm its done to all the poor little details.

Please join APAB(angry photographers against bokeh) today.
Together we have a fighting chance to beat this scourge on society. We can and we must put bokeh behind bars, behind fences and in the background once again.:D
file-64.jpg
 
Don't be a blurry fuzzy bokeh boy. Sharpen up.
If God hadn't wanted you to shoot sharp, he wouldn't have given lenses aperture blades. :rolleyes:
file-65.jpg
 
I'm speaking as someone who normally runs a mile when the B-word comes out (I think there is one picture on my Flickr where I mention it, and that's because a Trip 35 stopped down gives hilarious bad bokeh).

However, I'm rather enjoying this thread. I can't say that I'm converted, I'm not going to rush out and buy a lens as a result (though a few of Brian's wide open shots are pretty damn lovely), but it's mostly quite good fun. There are not too many heads stuck where they really shouldn't be yet.

I'm a little concerned about people buying lenses specifically for cat photographs, though. I can't quite imagine that. Are you sure that the euphemism being used really meant cat? I can just about see at a pinch that that might be a reason to buy a lens (though it might be a better reason just to buy a seperate memory card!).

Adrian
 
Gabriel M.A. said:
Some people like duck a l'orange (i.e. bokeh), others like macaroni and cheese (i.e. "sharpness")

Going on and on about how duck a l'orange isn't like macaroni and cheese shows more lack of understanding about duck a l'orange than about understanding macaroni and cheese. I believe you just have either when you feel like it.

Just sayin'
Click to expand...

hmm.... I go with the mashed potatoes and gravy. One needs both to be good for a successful meal. Each can be evaluated on its own merit, and one can have several successful flavors, but only when all parts *work/fit-together* one has pleasing results.

(P.S. I do not eat gravy, but I thought most folks will like the analogy --- perhaps think popcorn and butter)
 
Jack Conrad said:
Please join me, brothers and sisters, in a unified stand against Bokeh and the harm its done to all the poor little details.

Please join APAB(angry photographers against bokeh) today.
Together we have a fighting chance to beat this scourge on society. We can and we must put bokeh behind bars, behind fences and in the background once again.:D
file-64.jpg
Click to expand...

Funny! And good luck with this one... not all images work well with everything in focus. Several examples already posted here. But, APAB is a funny one!
 
Why do these threads always show either infinite or 1cm DOF ?

The real treats are in between :) ... like this:

1159119935_kCetf-O.jpg


TMX400-Scan-110919-0001.jpg


1090503266_Dohod-O.jpg


Enough details for context, nice 3d rendering of subject. Wouldn't be the same at f8 or above ....
 
redisburning said:
shooting a picture to produce MAXIMUM BOKEH : probably not very good
having bokeh in a picture incidentally : probably alright
having a gentle, graduated transition to OoF : potentially amazing
Click to expand...

How does this work? You decide, when looking at photography, whether or not the photographer had enough light to use a smaller aperture? That's how you assess whether the intent was to "produce maximum bokeh" versus grabbing enough light to eliminate shake?

"bokeh in a picture incidentally?" So, your assessment also factors in what focal length was used?

In my mind, all of these 'rules' are ridiculous. A picture works (for you) or it doesn't. Some people can make great photographs using "maximum bokeh" and some people can't. Some people can do it well most of the time, and some only some of the time. I don't get the point of EVER saying "bokeh isn't important." It obviously is — but just like 'sharpness' — how important depends on the individual image.

If you only look at Ansel Adams-ish landscapes, the frequency with which you notice bokeh will be... infrequent. But, should you accidentally encounter a Peter Lindbergh photograph, don't you have to react to the context? Anyone with only one set of rules to apply to all situations is a sad and frightening person.
 
Jack Conrad said:
Please join me, brothers and sisters, in a unified stand against Bokeh and the harm its done to all the poor little details.

Please join APAB(angry photographers against bokeh) today.
Together we have a fighting chance to beat this scourge on society. We can and we must put bokeh behind bars, behind fences and in the background once again.:D
Click to expand...

Jack, Jack, Jack.

What did you think would happen to those two Sonnars that you sold to me?

The Carl Zeiss 50/1.5, wide-open on an Amedeo Adapter. New front element.




and yes, that Uncoated Carl Zeiss Jena 5cm f1.5....



Sonnars. Ahhhh.:D
 
Last edited:
Is a high end P&S more suited for this :angel:

Jack Conrad said:
Please join me, brothers and sisters, in a unified stand against Bokeh and the harm its done to all the poor little details.

Please join APAB(angry photographers against bokeh) today.
Together we have a fighting chance to beat this scourge on society. We can and we must put bokeh behind bars, behind fences and in the background once again.:D
file-64.jpg
Click to expand...
 
dnk512 said:
hmm.... I go with the mashed potatoes and gravy. One needs both to be good for a successful meal. Each can be evaluated on its own merit, and one can have several successful flavors, but only when all parts *work/fit-together* one has pleasing results.

(P.S. I do not eat gravy, but I thought most folks will like the analogy --- perhaps think popcorn and butter)
Click to expand...

Isn't this the point? That there are some things so disgusting that no sane person goes out of their way to look for them? Or that at most, they put up with them when they have to?

Cheers,

R.
 
No one mentioned anything about having to be sane.

Look at how much time people around here spend on the Internet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom