DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Current Challenge >> Bokeh - Duh
Pages:  
Showing posts 226 - 250 of 259, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 01/07/2005 02:23:19 PM · #226
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
If the light is fairly uniform behind the subject, doesn't that mean that the 'circles of light' will blend together making them indistinguishable one from another (assuming the bokeh is of good quality)?

...which I also thought lead to effectively smoother bokeh which often enhances the appeal of the photo?

I'm just worried that people are going to be looking for 'circles' in the background when they may not be there...


To add to this, "circles of confusion" or light may not be circular unless you shoot wide open (in most cases); they take on the shape of your aperture blades. Hope this doesn't become a challenge where voters count the number of sides in the "polygon of confusion", ie. more expensive lens = more blades = more circular circle of light. edit - I do think it is important to introduce some points of light into your composition or as Eddy said it just becomes another shallow DOF challenge.

Message edited by author 2005-01-07 14:25:24.
 01/07/2005 02:29:12 PM · #227
Originally posted by orussell:
I do think it is important to introduce some points of light into your composition or as Eddy said it just becomes another shallow DOF challenge.


Really? I think I fundamentally disagree with this statement...I often prefer smooth, creamy looking bokeh (like some of the examples posted) without the sometimes harsh-looking points of light...

Maybe I'm missing something?
01/07/2005 02:43:24 PM · #228
Even though this concept is new to me, ,here are some of mine that I would consider fit for this challenge... I hope :-)




:-)
 01/07/2005 02:43:56 PM · #229
Originally posted by ahaze:
... Gordon's "Refraction", which to me is about a 15 on a 1-10 scale in a bokeh challenge.




To be honest, I'd probably only rate Gordon's image about a 7. There's no question that's it's a good demonstration of bokeh, and the diffraction effects are very cool, but IMO that image is ONLY about bokeh, and the blade of grass is just a distraction. Other than the novelty of the little rainbows, I don't find the photo particularly appealing. I much prefer his other two images- velvety smooth background bokeh that enhance beautiful subjects.

01/07/2005 03:00:45 PM · #230


Here is my contribution to a great challenge!

01/07/2005 03:38:49 PM · #231
Ok I am a bit confused.
I am sorry for my ignorance, but I have never actually studied photography and I am not familiar with the terms.
From what I see here, bokeh means simply a picture in a very shalow DOF. The subject is very clear and focused while the bg is a total blur. Is that what bokeh means?
 01/07/2005 03:45:19 PM · #232
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
Originally posted by orussell:
I do think it is important to introduce some points of light into your composition or as Eddy said it just becomes another shallow DOF challenge.


Really? I think I fundamentally disagree with this statement...I often prefer smooth, creamy looking bokeh (like some of the examples posted) without the sometimes harsh-looking points of light...

Maybe I'm missing something?


I have to agree with you Mike. I don't think a picture should be knocked down because it doesn't have "points of light" Often times that has to do with the quality of light, the lens, and other techinical details which are out of the control of the photographer. A smooth creamy look can be just as pleasing to the eye and satisfy the parameters of this challenge.
 01/07/2005 04:13:54 PM · #233
Wow, I apologize for being a big dummy.

I jumped right the the forums without even looking at the topic or the challenges! I thought this was a forum challenge.

Just ignore the buddha above :P
01/07/2005 05:19:14 PM · #234


Blurred sky (could be more blurred, even) enhances subject... Bokeh. :)
 01/07/2005 05:25:14 PM · #235
Originally posted by Jinjit:
From what I see here, bokeh means simply a picture in a very shalow DOF. The subject is very clear and focused while the bg is a total blur. Is that what bokeh means?


Shallow DOF = Shallow DOF. Bokeh is just a term you use when you discuss the quality of the out of focus part of the photo, regardless of the content of that background. Good bokeh, bad bokeh, neutral bokeh. As in that photo is 'cool' or that photo is not 'cool', or good use of the 'rule of thirds'.


01/07/2005 05:28:52 PM · #236
Originally posted by orussell:
I do think it is important to introduce some points of light into your composition or as Eddy said it just becomes another shallow DOF challenge.


That would be like 'this was a great hamburger because the onions tasted great'. The point of lights mostly say something about the aperture blade shape while bokeh is about so much more.


01/07/2005 05:30:53 PM · #237
Bloody Bokeh!
 01/07/2005 05:35:51 PM · #238
Originally posted by Azrifel:
Bokeh is just a term you use when you discuss the quality of the out of focus part of the photo...


Photographers are a lazy lot and it's just SOOO much easier to say, "Nice bokeh" rather than, "I really like the smooth tones and silky gradations in your background that make your subject stand out." Less time typing = more time shooting.

Hey Jodie... great shot. That bird's a hoot!
 01/07/2005 05:46:08 PM · #239

Do any of you like this one that I took last week in London?

01/07/2005 06:00:44 PM · #240
Originally posted by tunnelmuck:
Do any of you like this one that I took last week in London?



It's a nice picture but it wouldn't doo well in the Bokeh challenge. The clock is pretty clearly visible and not as niceley blurred as one would expect from this challenge.
 01/07/2005 07:23:57 PM · #241
Northern lighs with bokeh :)
Of course there is, just look at the stars, they've been confused into circles :)

NL have done quite well here recently, but this is probably pushing it too far :)
 01/07/2005 08:19:59 PM · #242
01/08/2005 08:04:53 AM · #243
Originally posted by Gordon:


Interesting photograph, but I am in doubt. Does the background enhance the subject or does it become a subject itself? Especially because the background is so busy and the butterfly (?) so far to the edge of the frame. I'd probably give this a 6 and tell you what I just said. The background has content to be able to discuss bokeh, but as a photograph I am in doubt about the effect of the background itself. :)


01/08/2005 08:14:44 AM · #244
Originally posted by Chrisds:
This is a great challenge.. I just shot my first idea and although it shows 'bokeh' it is also a really boring picture... well it is there until I get to shoot something new (if I get time!)

I came across this picture which would be a great entry for this challenge.. now if I could just fly to South Korea!



Come around May when the latern festival is on in preparation for Buddha's birthday ^^ you don't see that many lanterns any other time of the year.
 01/08/2005 12:00:09 PM · #245
There's no 'h' in boke.
01/08/2005 12:02:08 PM · #246
Originally posted by Koriyama:
There's no 'h' in boke.


How do you pronounce it? Is it bow-ka?
 01/08/2005 12:04:27 PM · #247
Originally posted by orussell:
Originally posted by Koriyama:
There's no 'h' in boke.


How do you pronounce it? Is it bow-ka?

Bow-keh

:)

But there's still no 'h' in the original Japanese. That's been added by us westerners.
 01/08/2005 12:06:10 PM · #248
Mike Johnson on photo.net claims responsibility for this one:

I first learned about "bo-ke" or boke in 1995, from Carl Weese, who learned about it from our mutual friend the oracular and extreme Oren Grad, who holds eight Master's degrees, three Ph.D.s, and an M.D., and who evidently taught himself Japanese so he could read Japanese photo magazines. (Perhaps I exaggerate these facts, but only slightly.) I then commissioned and published three articles about it in the March/April 1997 issue of Photo Techniques back when I was editor — one each by John Kennerdell, who is an American ex-pat living in Bangkok, Oren himself, and Harold Merklinger, a high-ranking research scientist in the Canadian defense establishment. It's one of the few issues of that magazine that sold out. My own contribution was...er, a letter. I decided that people too readily mispronounced "boke," so I added an "h" to the word in our articles, and voilá, "bokeh" was born. A Google search for the word "bokeh" just now resulted in approximately 13,300 hits. Seems the idea's gotten around.
 01/08/2005 12:10:48 PM · #249
There you go.
 01/08/2005 12:55:43 PM · #250
how's this for bokeh...?


Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/12/2025 08:04:31 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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 08:04:31 AM EDT.