May 24, 2018, 02:46:32 AM

Author Topic: Bokeh: Good vs. Bad?  (Read 18163 times)

TommyLee

  • EOS 80D
  • ****
  • Posts: 280
Re: Bokeh: Good vs. Bad?
« Reply #15 on: December 03, 2014, 12:39:13 PM »
The most important thing about bokeh for me is, that it have to serve a purpose. Here is some of the pitfalls I see with bokeh.

1: Boring subject - creamy bokeh- still a boring photo.
2: Not paying attention to the blurred parts of the photo(colour, composition etc).
3: Bokeh for the sake of bokeh. If you are taking a picture of your girlfriend in front of the Eiffel Tower, it would be pretty stupid if the Eiffel Tower is completely blurred.

if pic of girlfriend ....includes.....the Tower .... rendered in a recognize-able icon, creamy impressionistic blur... that sounds like a compositional choice to me...

I often have a prime and secondary subject...
prime = child eye
secondary = father laughing..wanted him more blurred....
this is not best example...because father is too close to being focused...not quite my goal....
but headed there...

////

I cant find my shot of daughter focused ...with mother and father ...recognizeable by relatives..blured in bokeh... 3 objects ...daughter-focused and parents-blured....made a nice composition...
was sigma 35 @f1.4... smooth parents...dead-sharp daughter....
this is the fun to try this stuff... IMO

« Last Edit: December 03, 2014, 12:48:17 PM by TommyLee »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Bokeh: Good vs. Bad?
« Reply #15 on: December 03, 2014, 12:39:13 PM »

AcutancePhotography

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1853
Re: Bokeh: Good vs. Bad?
« Reply #16 on: December 03, 2014, 12:57:56 PM »
Bokeh, like other compositional parts of the art of photography is open to interpretation as to what is good or bad.

To me, "good" bokeh is bokeh that is of a consistant shape throughout the image.  On lower quality lenses, the shape of Bokeh can change as one moves to the corner/edges. The shape of the bokeh is influenced by the number and types of blades.  But in my opinion, regardless of the shape of the bokeh, "good" bokeh should be of a consistent shape throughout the image

"Good" bokeh should have a consistent tone throughout each individual occurance of bokeh*.  "Bad" bokeh may have darker or lighter rings around each individual occurance of bokeh.  There can be banding or changing of the tones inside each bokeh area.

One, can't ignore the shape of the Bokeh either.  But I don't consider that a matter of "good" or "bad" bokeh, just different types of Bokeh and the individual artist may have preferences. Some may consider circular bokeh more pleasing than a more angular, but, in my opinion, both can be either good or bad bokeh.

I personally have not worred too much about Bokeh.  I know there are some photographers where bokeh is an important part of their composition.  I am just not one to focus on the bokeh (pun intended)

*assuming that the area of the Bokeh is of one color/tone, of course. :)
I shoot with a Camera Obscura with an optical device attached that refracts and transmits light

stevelee

  • EOS 7D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 497
Re: Bokeh: Good vs. Bad?
« Reply #17 on: April 12, 2018, 09:49:45 AM »
Bokeh, like other compositional parts of the art of photography is open to interpretation as to what is good or bad.

To me, "good" bokeh is bokeh that is of a consistant shape throughout the image.  On lower quality lenses, the shape of Bokeh can change as one moves to the corner/edges. The shape of the bokeh is influenced by the number and types of blades.  But in my opinion, regardless of the shape of the bokeh, "good" bokeh should be of a consistent shape throughout the image

"Good" bokeh should have a consistent tone throughout each individual occurance of bokeh*.  "Bad" bokeh may have darker or lighter rings around each individual occurance of bokeh.  There can be banding or changing of the tones inside each bokeh area.

One, can't ignore the shape of the Bokeh either.  But I don't consider that a matter of "good" or "bad" bokeh, just different types of Bokeh and the individual artist may have preferences. Some may consider circular bokeh more pleasing than a more angular, but, in my opinion, both can be either good or bad bokeh.

I personally have not worred too much about Bokeh.  I know there are some photographers where bokeh is an important part of their composition.  I am just not one to focus on the bokeh (pun intended)

*assuming that the area of the Bokeh is of one color/tone, of course. :)

In short, for me, good "bucket" (as I use the "Keeping Up Appearances" spelling) doesn't call attention to itself. The point of a blurred background is not to compete with the subject and other items in more or less good focus and not to distract from them. If your first reaction to a picture is "what good 'bucket'," then the lens/picture/photographer has failed that mission. Obviously the "what bad 'bucket'!" reaction is even worse. Items you mentioned will contribute to that, such as different funny shapes in different parts of the picture. OTOH, the doughnut shapes from mirror lenses looked cool and definitely were the subject of the pictures, intentionally or not.

CanonFanBoy

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2068
  • I like cheap wine and even cheaper women.
Re: Bokeh: Good vs. Bad?
« Reply #18 on: April 21, 2018, 04:15:15 PM »
I have heard bokeh described as "creamy", "busy", "smooth", "harsh", and all sorts of other subjective names. But what, exactly, is good bokeh contrasted with bad bokeh? I would appreciate some real-world examples of both kinds, and just for fun, what lens gives you the best bokeh in most conditions?

Generally, IMHO, bokeh quality is over rated.

Yep. All a matter of personal taste isn't it? Sometimes those different shapes (oval, cat eye, hexagon, pentagon, onion, bubble, etc.) make the photo fun.

Edit: Oops! Just realized this thread is years old.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2018, 04:18:54 PM by CanonFanBoy »
5D Mark III, Canon EF 24-70 F/2.8L II, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, 35 f/1.4L II, 135 f/2L, Streaklight 360ws, Flashpoint XPLOR 600PRO, 26x m42 screw mount lenses adapted to my DSLR. Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II, Olympus M. Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro

Jack Douglas

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 5267
  • http://www.gohaidagwaii.ca/blog/eagle-photography-
Re: Bokeh: Good vs. Bad?
« Reply #19 on: April 22, 2018, 03:51:23 AM »
Pookie, in your sample bokeh is really what stood out for me. ;)

Interesting topic.  I must say that my 400 DO II with bright glistening background like water can look pretty ugly, still producing the onions, but overall it performs well.

Jack
1DX2   11-24 F4   24-70 F4   70-200 F2.8 II   300 F2.8 II   1.4X III   2X III   400 DO F4 II 

http://yourshot.nationalgeographic.com/profile/647784/

PavelR

  • EOS Rebel T7i
  • ****
  • Posts: 147
Re: Bokeh: Good vs. Bad?
« Reply #20 on: April 22, 2018, 04:47:02 AM »
The lens I own and like the most for the bokeh is 200/2 (see the attached images).
There are also other which I like too: 120-300/2.8S, 85/1.2 II, 50/1.4A, 300/2.8.
(I do not own 400/2.8, but the bokeh is superb...)

stevelee

  • EOS 7D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 497
Re: Bokeh: Good vs. Bad?
« Reply #21 on: April 22, 2018, 07:42:41 AM »
For my tastes some of those backgrounds look good, and some of them are distracting and would be better a little less blurry.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Bokeh: Good vs. Bad?
« Reply #21 on: April 22, 2018, 07:42:41 AM »

Jack Douglas

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 5267
  • http://www.gohaidagwaii.ca/blog/eagle-photography-
Re: Bokeh: Good vs. Bad?
« Reply #22 on: April 22, 2018, 12:24:51 PM »
My rather uneducated comment would be that the photographer still has to be very careful about background choices irrespective of lens used and its bokeh characteristic.  Just because objects are not clearly identifiable doesn't mean they can't be producing undesirable visual effects.  Easier said than done, of course and some subjects can't or won't cooperate.

Jack
1DX2   11-24 F4   24-70 F4   70-200 F2.8 II   300 F2.8 II   1.4X III   2X III   400 DO F4 II 

http://yourshot.nationalgeographic.com/profile/647784/

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Bokeh: Good vs. Bad?
« Reply #22 on: April 22, 2018, 12:24:51 PM »