08-17-11 – Mmm Bokeh 2: Electric Bokehloo

Forums Forums Farktography General Chat This week’s contest 08-17-11 – Mmm Bokeh 2: Electric Bokehloo

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 128 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #29241
    ravnostic
    Participant

    What about specialty filters and their effects?

    Using a shaped aperture should be OK, but a soft focus filter or something along those lines would’t really count.

    The soft-focus effect is inherent in the lens (I’ve gallery shots that demonstrate that /less so in ‘macro’ configuration, it seems/–usually the plates reduce the softness, but introduce other interesting elements). I’ll have to take the DP out with the new body and see if I can play with the various shapes and come up with something that I’d like for the contest.

    That particular shot, IIRC, came from an asterisk shaped plate. But there’s 19 other shapes, and I’ve been looking for a good excuse to go toying with them. This must be it. 8)

    #29267
    EdenLiesObscured
    Participant

    What about lens reversal macros?

    #29272
    Yugoboy
    Participant

    Before I impose myself on someone, I figure I’ll ask.

    Would someone mind terribly OBO-ing my Bokeh entries?
    Respond here or PM me. TIA!

    I should be home in time for Barren Macro.

    #29273
    Kestrana
    Participant

    Yeah i can obo, just PM me links beforehand

    #29274
    Yugoboy
    Participant

    Yeah i can obo, just PM me links beforehand

    Thanx kindly… they’re winging their way to you momentarily

    #29275
    Elsinore
    Keymaster

    I just wanted to say that I am not the picky sort of person who quibbles over fine points of a definition. I based my reply on some particularly snarky Flickr comments sparking a bokeh debate. I didn’t follow them to the end to see the official call.

    No worries. And the bokeh groups I’ve admin’d were over on Flickr, so I can imagine the 9th circle of hell level ridiculousness that debate almost certainly devolved into….

    The soft-focus effect is inherent in the lens

    I understand what you’re getting at, but bokeh isn’t really about uniform soft-focus effects, inherent or no. It’s about how the out-of-focus parts of the image are rendered. Soft-focus means even the in-focus parts of the image are fuzzy.

    #29276
    Kestrana
    Participant

    Yeah I really don’t think soft focus effects are at all what we’re going for. You need that distinct in focus element for contrast.

    #29277
    ravnostic
    Participant

    I get that soft focus isn’t bokeh, was just saying it’s part of the DP’s nature. That doesn’t rule it’s usage for the contest, does it, assuming the image elsewise displays bokeh? Not saying I MUST use the lens (in fact, I’m very in love with my 50mm f1/4 for it’s shallow DOF and took some lovely shots with it this weekend), but I’d like to have it as an option. It’s really a fun lens to use, despite it’s weight and other shortcomings.

    #29278
    Elsinore
    Keymaster

    No, if the image demonstrates bokeh and not simply soft focus, you should be fine, though I’m not sure how well an image like the one you posted earlier in the thread would do in a bokeh theme thread.

    #29279
    ravnostic
    Participant

    No, if the image demonstrates bokeh and not simply soft focus, you should be fine, though I’m not sure how well an image like the one you posted earlier in the thread would do in a bokeh theme thread.

    Yeah, that’s my concern, too. 🙁 But maybe I’ll get one I like. I try to take shots with all my lenses for most contests, for the practice with each.

    #29280
    ravnostic
    Participant

    Elsinore, since you mod some bokeh forums, can you post some links to some really good examples of quality shots so I can focus my efforts toward the right sort of imagery?

    #29281
    Elsinore
    Keymaster

    Here’s Bokeh for the Common Folk
    http://www.flickr.com/groups/bokehfolk/

    And Bokeh: Smooth and Silky
    http://www.flickr.com/groups/bokeh_/

    And as much as I normally can’t stand Ken Rockwell, he’s got a decent page on Bokeh here: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/bokeh.htm . It goes into more technical stuff about what generates more pleasing bokeh vs bokeh that distracts.

    #29282
    ravnostic
    Participant

    ” If they are all swimmy and look little little rolled up condoms or donuts, then that’s bad bokeh.”

    lol

    thanks, E

    #29283
    Yugoboy
    Participant

    OK… I now feel a lot better about my bokeh entries…

    I am, however, considering a review of my archives due to the larger subject matter illustrated in Elsinore‘s examples…

    I know I’ve got a LOT of non-macro examples hidden in there… if I get the time, kestrana may get a second PM…

    #29286
    U-Man
    Participant

    I may be late, but I’d like to quibble a bit about the description. Way back when, I authored the title and description – ‘Mmmm Bokeh’ Show us shallow DoF. (or something like that). But I was young and (more) ignorant. The two are not really synonymous. Are they? I mean you can get narrow DoF with a macro on a solid background without showing ‘bokeh’ per se. I envision bokeh as using the out-of-focus blobs as part of the composition. Granted, that is best done with a wide aperture and it does involve relatively shallow Dof, but bokeh is more than just shallow Dof. Right?

    Anyway, I suggest that the description gets tweaked a tiny bit this week to read something like, “Show us bokeh using shallow depth of field.”

    Also, if you’re having trouble narrowing down your choices this week, I bet that a good portion of the voters have the narrower definition of blobs-of-light-in-the-background in their heads.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 128 total)
  • The topic ‘08-17-11 – Mmm Bokeh 2: Electric Bokehloo’ is closed to new replies.