| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/03/2005 07:23:30 AM · #51 |
Do these have Bokeh? I think they do, but now I'm trying to figure out how to do it on purpose.
  |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 08:29:53 AM · #52 |
Originally posted by scrum8:
Do these have Bokeh? I think they do, but now I'm trying to figure out how to do it on purpose.
|
These defenitively have bokeh. The first one works especially well, as it really enhances the subject.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 08:49:07 AM · #53 |
Some examples of mine... can anyone confirm whether or not they fit the challenge?
   
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 09:08:43 AM · #54 |
And here's one that I prepared earlier...
Message edited by author 2005-01-03 09:09:02. |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 09:32:50 AM · #55 |
Ben,
I don't think that Sunburst (the 1st photo) does so much but all the othes do IMO. I really like the effect achieved with Snowflakes (I think that's the name of it) with the blur in the foreground; don't know how it'd do in the challenge but I like the effect.
Kev |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 09:49:09 AM · #56 |
| My submission is in...number 1! |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 10:05:37 AM · #57 |
Amazing bokeh!
:-)
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 10:13:19 AM · #58 |
RE:Technique Challenge: Loosely defined, bokeh is the quality and "feel" of the out-of-focus foreground and background elements of a photo. It isn't very interesting by itself, but take a photograph whose subject is enhanced by the bokeh of the background
So it's it more like the foreground and background are out of focus see the photo's in the link below
Boken
Just wondering?
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 10:29:03 AM · #59 |
Originally posted by RHoldenSr:
Loosely defined, bokeh is the quality and "feel" of the out-of-focus foreground and background elements of a photo.
I think this is going to cause a lot of hammering LOL |
Agree, this should be changed to read foreground OR background elements. as the rest of the challenge detail seems to be focusing on the background effect.
Message edited by author 2005-01-03 10:31:40.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 10:31:48 AM · #60 |
My 50mm F1.4 will come in handy for this one :)
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 10:42:58 AM · #61 |
These images are from my Favourites and by various DPC photographers.
How do people feel about them in relation to this challenge?
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 10:43:59 AM · #62 |
Ideally, the goal should be to capture a shot where the round, out of focus background spots enhance your subject, like this:
(and yes, I agree that this is a good challenge for portraiture)
Message edited by author 2005-01-03 10:45:57. |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 10:50:22 AM · #63 |
would this be right for the challenge?
or does something have to be out of focus in the foreground too? |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 10:51:59 AM · #64 |
This is a great challenge.
Thanks for posting the links.
Would this background enhance? |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 10:53:23 AM · #65 |
| That's a great one, Heida. I think the key is to have a spotted or dappled background rather than merely out of focus. |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 11:30:15 AM · #66 |
Finally, a challenge where I (hopefully) wont get punished by the voters for liking a shallow dof :-)
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 11:43:50 AM · #67 |
I hope I can reshot this one.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 11:49:56 AM · #68 |
Heida, Marjo, Calvert;
Allthose are "pure" bokeh shots, especially Marjo's, with the out of focus blobs being lens artefacts.
The kind I've been posting are a different breed of image, with more "blur" than specular aberrations. It's interesting because as far as the CHALLENGE goes mine fit the bill brecisely, but as far as the technical definition of a "bokeh" goes these are much closer to home.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 11:58:10 AM · #69 |
| The challenge details have been updated to clarify the wording that either out-of-focus foreground or background elements make up the "bokeh". Entries are not required to have both an out-of-focus foreground and background. |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 12:03:22 PM · #70 |
Originally posted by Kavey:
These images are from my Favourites and by various DPC photographers.
How do people feel about them in relation to this challenge? |
In my opinion, those are fine examples of shallow depth-of-field... although some may argue that there is some "bokeh effect" in the last one. But to me, the "Bokeh" challenge is about more than just shallow DOF. It is about exploring shallow DOF and how a lens renders what would otherwise be details in the background, and how such bokeh can enhance a photo (such as scalvert's excellent example). A plain/simple background usually does not lend itself to exploring lens bokeh.
And yes, portraiture, wildlife and sports photography are all common places where bokeh can been seen in everyday pictures.
And for what it's worth, there is "pleasing bokeh" and "not-as-pleasing bokeh". Check out this comparison of the Canon 50mm 1.8 vs the 1.4; scroll down to the section on "bokeh".
Message edited by author 2005-01-03 12:11:49. |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 12:13:24 PM · #71 |
I agree that a plain background that just happens to be out of focus is not neccesarily a good example of bokeh, as I understand the explanations of the term.
The images I picked all seem to me be ones that would not work where the out of focus areas simply plain - it's essential to have the shapes and colours and forms as they are in order for the image to succeed...
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 12:17:18 PM · #72 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
That's a great one, Heida. I think the key is to have a spotted or dappled background rather than merely out of focus. |
this was always my understanding of bokeh as well. after all the posts to this thread though, i was starting to think that maybe i was just severely mistaken.
|
|
|
|
01/03/2005 12:22:45 PM · #73 |
Originally posted by EddyG:
Check out this comparison of the Canon 50mm 1.8 vs the 1.4 |
Uh, oh... there goes the lens I was going to use. This topic certainly favors the well-equipped DSLR photographers. |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 12:23:06 PM · #74 |
Originally posted by brianlh:
Originally posted by scalvert:
I think the key is to have a spotted or dappled background rather than merely out of focus. |
this was always my understanding of bokeh as well. after all the posts to this thread though, i was starting to think that maybe i was just severely mistaken. |
FWIW, I totally agree with Shannon -- spotted or dappled backgrounds are a key way to analyze the "quality" and "feeling" of a particular lens' bokeh, and will be what folks look for when voting. |
|
|
|
01/03/2005 12:24:26 PM · #75 |
Originally posted by brianlh:
Originally posted by scalvert:
That's a great one, Heida. I think the key is to have a spotted or dappled background rather than merely out of focus. |
this was always my understanding of bokeh as well. after all the posts to this thread though, i was starting to think that maybe i was just severely mistaken. |
Now I am going to ask you about the technical aspects of this. How do I get this ? Any aperture range that works well ? Do I need some backlit ? any relation between distance to foreground and distance from foreground to background ? I know there won't be one answer, but what does your experience say ? |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/12/2025 10:05:34 AM EDT.
