***Acurazine Photo Contest #17: BOKEH***
12-16-2007, 07:59 PM
#82
Photography Nerd
Originally Posted by technoviking
I'm not knocking you.
But these is nothing specifically stating shallow depth is a primary point for bokeh, just how you deal with points of non-focus. The best examples of course being highly shallow shots. I know I had a lens flare in my frame when I took the shot. It wasnt an accident.
As such, I also know I could have focused on the flare making it sharp and my subject soft. What I wanted was the main subject of my photo in focus with a lens flare. The soft flare to me is a form of bokeh. Its out of focus, and dealing the shape of my aperture. And that was a choice I made when I shot it.
But these is nothing specifically stating shallow depth is a primary point for bokeh, just how you deal with points of non-focus. The best examples of course being highly shallow shots. I know I had a lens flare in my frame when I took the shot. It wasnt an accident.
As such, I also know I could have focused on the flare making it sharp and my subject soft. What I wanted was the main subject of my photo in focus with a lens flare. The soft flare to me is a form of bokeh. Its out of focus, and dealing the shape of my aperture. And that was a choice I made when I shot it.
Originally Posted by wnderlst
The contest topic could be thought of as "Limited Depth of Field," but I'd like the concentration to be on the out-of-focus portions of the photographs.
< puts snob hat back on >
Bokeh can be in the foreground or the background, and by definition, having a limited depth of field is a requirement. You can't have a hyperfocal scene that has good bokeh, because everything will be sharp.
Bokeh is simply the aesthetic quality of out of focus highlights. Nothing more, nothing less. Since it's a qualitative thing, some may prefer different looks, but understanding what bokeh is doesn't make someone a snob. As I said before, I'm sure the contest theme isn't to judge the quality of someone's bokeh. I think the intent is to have the out-of-focus areas be the subject of the photo.
Let's let the blur take center stage!
12-16-2007, 08:00 PM
#83
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,248
Received 2,787 Likes
on
1,987 Posts
omg.. i just realized i couldve so done this at vegas, but i just thought that background blur was bokeh
<~~
<~~
12-16-2007, 08:01 PM
#85
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by Mizouse
omg.. i just realized i couldve so done this at vegas, but i just thought that background blur was bokeh
<~~
<~~
<------- fellow photo noob
12-16-2007, 08:07 PM
#86
The Third Ball
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Los Angeles, Ca
Age: 45
Posts: 49,244
Received 4,916 Likes
on
2,616 Posts
Originally Posted by Dan Martin
Re-read the rules on P.1 and wndrlst specifically mentioned limited depth of field:
This is another Salton Sea image. You might remember something similar in my original series, except you can see it has has rained since my my first time there. This has also been cross processed. And this is another using my digital camera v. the film camera I had there as well
"Keep Your Ass Off"
12-16-2007, 08:22 PM
#87
Earth-bound misfit
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by srika
***Acurazine Photo Contest #17: Something Blurry***
In that case, can I post a shot I took today that has camera-shake blur?
Leave it to me to post a photo contest that becomes controversial.
12-16-2007, 08:28 PM
#88
Senior Moderator
Dan and SS, most of the defintions of bokeh I find online are much looser that what you describe. For example.
John Kennerdell, the author of one of three articles in PHOTO Techniques (PT) that introduced boke to the West, had the following to say on Mike Johnston's blog: "In retrospect, in those articles in PT we should have introduced one more Japanese word: 'pinto' (prononunced 'peen-toe,' not like the beans). It means in-focus. Anything in a photo that isn't pinto is boke. It really is that simple."
12-16-2007, 08:31 PM
#89
Have camera, will travel
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Federal Way, WA
Age: 62
Posts: 7,783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by wndrlst
In that case, can I post a shot I took today that has camera-shake blur?
Leave it to me to post a photo contest that becomes controversial.
12-16-2007, 08:35 PM
#90
The Third Ball
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Los Angeles, Ca
Age: 45
Posts: 49,244
Received 4,916 Likes
on
2,616 Posts
Originally Posted by fdl
Dan and SS, most of the defintions of bokeh I find online are much looser that what you describe. For example.
ding ding ding.
totally subjective.
12-16-2007, 08:39 PM
#92
Originally Posted by Mizouse
omg.. i just realized i couldve so done this at vegas, but i just thought that background blur was bokeh
<~~
<~~
12-16-2007, 08:40 PM
#93
Photography Nerd
Originally Posted by fdl
Dan and SS, most of the defintions of bokeh I find online are much looser that what you describe. For example.
If an out-of-focus background is dark, you won't have any bokeh because you won't be able to make out the texture of the out-of-focus areas. Out-of-focus light is what gives you bokeh.
12-16-2007, 08:45 PM
#94
Originally Posted by fdl
Dan and SS, most of the defintions of bokeh I find online are much looser that what you describe. For example.
Originally Posted by Street Spirit
A contest topic of 'background blur' would change things quite a bit and make things pretty simple, IMO; just choose any pic you've taken with a shallow depth of field. 
12-16-2007, 08:46 PM
#95
Senior Moderator
I'm just saying that the definition you describe is a lot more narrow than what other definitions say. I'm not sure there is an authoritative source for this definition?
12-16-2007, 08:48 PM
#96
Senior Moderator
And I don't think anyone is saying that a simple blurred background is "good" bokeh anyways. . The kind of stuff you are describing is definitely more interesting and beautiful.
12-16-2007, 09:11 PM
#97
Earth-bound misfit
Thread Starter
THESE ARE NOT SUBMISSIONS!
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/moxiephotos/259738234/" title="Autumn Palette with bokeh by wndrlst, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/72/259738234_ccf4759a12.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="Autumn Palette with bokeh" /></a>
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/moxiephotos/270917253/" title="Maple by wndrlst, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/85/270917253_1f67aa4dd3.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="Maple" /></a>
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/moxiephotos/270708008/" title="Autumn Tree Branch by wndrlst, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/113/270708008_d63d11de34.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="Autumn Tree Branch" /></a>
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/moxiephotos/253743975/" title="Backlit Purple by wndrlst, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/112/253743975_0b1d161a4d.jpg" width="500" height="351" alt="Backlit Purple" /></a>
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/moxiephotos/255637661/" title="Untitled by wndrlst, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/117/255637661_a738d50e42.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="" /></a>
I just wanted to post some examples of bokeh for the thread/discussion. The discs of light (as Dan described) are inarguable examples of bokeh. That said, I have seen definitions of bokeh that include the coalescence of these discs into background blur. It's my understanding that the "good" vs. "bad" bokeh stems from the ability of these discs to blend in a pleasing manner. (This is another topic entirely, and agree that it's beyond the intended scope of this competition.)
Photos 1 & 4 above demonstrate the coalescing bokeh also. I do think the discrete discs make for a more interesting photo, and (again, as Dan said) these are achieved by individual points of OOF light.
I'm not opposed to entries including either or both types, I guess....it's up to the voters to determine which they like best.
Comments?
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/moxiephotos/259738234/" title="Autumn Palette with bokeh by wndrlst, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/72/259738234_ccf4759a12.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="Autumn Palette with bokeh" /></a>
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/moxiephotos/270917253/" title="Maple by wndrlst, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/85/270917253_1f67aa4dd3.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="Maple" /></a>
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/moxiephotos/270708008/" title="Autumn Tree Branch by wndrlst, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/113/270708008_d63d11de34.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="Autumn Tree Branch" /></a>
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/moxiephotos/253743975/" title="Backlit Purple by wndrlst, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/112/253743975_0b1d161a4d.jpg" width="500" height="351" alt="Backlit Purple" /></a>
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/moxiephotos/255637661/" title="Untitled by wndrlst, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/117/255637661_a738d50e42.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="" /></a>
I just wanted to post some examples of bokeh for the thread/discussion. The discs of light (as Dan described) are inarguable examples of bokeh. That said, I have seen definitions of bokeh that include the coalescence of these discs into background blur. It's my understanding that the "good" vs. "bad" bokeh stems from the ability of these discs to blend in a pleasing manner. (This is another topic entirely, and agree that it's beyond the intended scope of this competition.)
Photos 1 & 4 above demonstrate the coalescing bokeh also. I do think the discrete discs make for a more interesting photo, and (again, as Dan said) these are achieved by individual points of OOF light.
I'm not opposed to entries including either or both types, I guess....it's up to the voters to determine which they like best.
Comments?
12-16-2007, 09:21 PM
#99
Photography Nerd
Thanks for clearing up your intentions wndrlst, and I'm glad we're on the same page.
Beautiful shots by the way!
I'm still trying to think of what I'm going to shoot for this contest, but something will come to me...
Beautiful shots by the way!
I'm still trying to think of what I'm going to shoot for this contest, but something will come to me...
12-16-2007, 09:30 PM
#100
Earth-bound misfit
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Dan Martin
Thanks for clearing up your intentions wndrlst, and I'm glad we're on the same page.
Beautiful shots by the way!
I'm still trying to think of what I'm going to shoot for this contest, but something will come to me...
Beautiful shots by the way!
I'm still trying to think of what I'm going to shoot for this contest, but something will come to me...
12-16-2007, 10:59 PM
#101
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by wndrlst
THESE ARE NOT SUBMISSIONS!
12-16-2007, 11:15 PM
#102
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Not Las Vegas (SF Bay Area)
Age: 40
Posts: 63,248
Received 2,787 Likes
on
1,987 Posts
Originally Posted by Dan Martin
Vegas is a dream location for this contest!!
12-17-2007, 06:28 AM
#104
The Creator
Originally Posted by Street Spirit
Okay....So I've pretty much always had at least one photo I could've entered for all of these AZ contests, but I've always felt weird about doing it. 
Here we are at contest #17, and with a lot of nudging (read: threats) from Dan, I'm throwing in a pic.
Here we are at contest #17, and with a lot of nudging (read: threats) from Dan, I'm throwing in a pic.
12-17-2007, 07:17 PM
#106
Safety Car
i'm assuming level of bokeh is upto the poster, right?
i'm going to try to take some photo with 50.4, but I'm not sure if I want to go all out with f/1.4
hopefully I can take some interesting photo
i'm going to try to take some photo with 50.4, but I'm not sure if I want to go all out with f/1.4
hopefully I can take some interesting photo
12-17-2007, 07:33 PM
#107
Photography Nerd
Originally Posted by yohan81718
i'm assuming level of bokeh is upto the poster, right?
i'm going to try to take some photo with 50.4, but I'm not sure if I want to go all out with f/1.4
hopefully I can take some interesting photo
i'm going to try to take some photo with 50.4, but I'm not sure if I want to go all out with f/1.4
hopefully I can take some interesting photo
12-18-2007, 11:54 AM
#109
Earth-bound misfit
Thread Starter
^Yeah, where are the entries from the people who were haranguing me?
12-18-2007, 12:06 PM
#110
B A N N E D
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: in Madison, WI from Chicago, IL
Posts: 3,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
theyre coming... you waited so long we all got distracted with other stuff. 
I'm waiting for my triumphant return to Chicago to shoot, I'll be posting mine sometime this weekend.
I'm waiting for my triumphant return to Chicago to shoot, I'll be posting mine sometime this weekend.
12-18-2007, 12:16 PM
#111
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by wndrlst
^Yeah, where are the entries from the people who were haranguing me?
12-18-2007, 12:20 PM
#112
Earth-bound misfit
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by srika
glad I wasn't one of them!
Yeah, well, I happen to know you've got a couple of entries that would be just perfect anyway, so get on it! 
12-18-2007, 12:29 PM
#114
Earth-bound misfit
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by dom
Can I still vote if I have no clue what Bokeh is?
I'll expect a 5 page thesis on your research before accepting your vote. You may post it here or send via pm...either is acceptable.
12-18-2007, 12:33 PM
#115
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by wndrlst
Yeah, well, I happen to know you've got a couple of entries that would be just perfect anyway, so get on it! lolreally though January 2nd sounds like a good day to shoot...
or, December 27th.
12-18-2007, 12:47 PM
#116
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by wndrlst
I'll expect a 5 page thesis on your research before accepting your vote. You may post it here or send via pm...either is acceptable.
Ouch Dom, that sux.
Better get to work 
12-18-2007, 05:30 PM
#118
Intermediate
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Peak-a-boo
Obviously not a contender, but thought I would lighten up this thread as well as show some front and rear bokeh. That is if my interpretation of bokeh is correct!?
