Bokeh, Bokeh, Bokeh

S

Stereodude

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 20, 2000
Messages
3,285
Lets see some Bokeh!

My contribution:

IMG_3870.jpg
 
And how would I do that on my Olympus C-5060WZ? :D

I have never tried taking pictures like that. Is it just a shallow depth of field? I think my camera goes down to f2.8.
 
ahh :D here we go,

cat 1.jpg


cat 2.jpg

this shot was hard cause the flower was blowing all over the place in the wind and it was in a dark area, it took me several shots and this was the best one i came up with :/
HA.jpg
 
Originally posted by torment
And how would I do that on my Olympus C-5060WZ? :D

I have never tried taking pictures like that. Is it just a shallow depth of field? I think my camera goes down to f2.8.
Click to expand...
its near impossible to get a compact digital to do it, the lenses just arent good enough
 
Originally posted by Mr_Bucket
its near impossible to get a compact digital to do it, the lenses just arent good enough
Click to expand...

dof isn't a function of the quality of the lens, merely it's a function of the aperture and the size of the sensor. It is near impossible because most compact digitals have a very small sensor which makes their dof rather large.
 
Originally posted by Neb
dof isn't a function of the quality of the lens, merely it's a function of the aperture and the size of the sensor. It is near impossible because most compact digitals have a very small sensor which makes their dof rather large.
Click to expand...


a better quality lens will produce a better bokeh
 
lol true but u missed the point he was making, he was talking about the dof itself and its size, not the quality of the bokeh it creates.
 
Originally posted by Hooker
lol true but u missed the point he was making, he was talking about the dof itself and its size, not the quality of the bokeh it creates.
Click to expand...
then he missed my point in my post
 
Originally posted by torment
And how would I do that on my Olympus C-5060WZ? :D

I have never tried taking pictures like that. Is it just a shallow depth of field? I think my camera goes down to f2.8.
Click to expand...

Originally posted by Mr_Bucket
its near impossible to get a compact digital to do it, the lenses just arent good enough
Click to expand...

Originally posted by Mr_Bucket
a better quality lens will produce a better bokeh
Click to expand...

Originally posted by Mr_Bucket
then he missed my point in my post
Click to expand...

Ok, I don't see where in your post you mentioned quality of the dof.

lets see:

torment asked "how would I do that on my Olympus C-5060WZ?" and "is it just a shallow depth of field?"

you replied "its near impossible to get a compact digital to do it" It, obviously referring to "shallow depth of field". and then saying "the lenses just arent good enough" to which I replied to.

now tell me, where in your original post do you mention bokeh quality?
 
Originally posted by Mr_Bucket
i win :D :cool: :p
Click to expand...
I'm not so sure about that exactly. The first picture (horse) has so-so bokeh. The last one looks like good bokeh. I'm not sure I can tell on the 2nd.
 
Originally posted by Stereodude
These would be good examples of bad bokeh.
Click to expand...

I have to admit, the bokeh on those shots are very distracting for the picture. :(
 
oic what u mean, oh wells i was goin for that effect on purpose. i personally like it, and that is what matters for me. : D
 
Why can't we be friends,
Why can't we be friends,
Why can't we be friends,
Why can't we be friends?
 
Originally posted by Neb
I have to admit, the bokeh on those shots are very distracting for the picture. :(
Click to expand...
No, that's not what I meant.

Consult the quick example below of how out of focus light sources might look:

bokeh.jpg


Good or bad bokeh deals with the way the lens handles the light from out of focus objects.
 
Originally posted by Stereodude
No, that's not what I meant.

Consult the quick example below of how out of focus light sources might look:

<snip>

Good or bad bokeh deals with the way the lens handles the light from out of focus objects.
Click to expand...

Yea, I understand that, but bad bokeh tends to divert the eye more than good bokeh ;)
 
Originally posted by Mr_Bucket
japanese word for the background being out of foucs
Click to expand...
Not exactly...

From the Wikipedia: "Bokeh is the transliteration of a Japanese word for 'blur.' Bokeh is the subjective aesthetic quality of out-of-focus areas of an image projected by a camera lens."
 
here are some of mine i took with my 10D

iMG_0965.jpg


IMG_1102.jpg


IMG_2886.jpg


IMG_2917.jpg
 
Originally posted by Stereodude
Not exactly...

From the Wikipedia: "Bokeh is the transliteration of a Japanese word for 'blur.' Bokeh is the subjective aesthetic quality of out-of-focus areas of an image projected by a camera lens."
Click to expand...

man, your worse than bucket and macros :rolleyes:
 
Originally posted by FLECOM
man, your worse than bucket and macros :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
How do you figure?

I started a thread about Bokeh, I'd hope I knew what it meant. It doesn't really have that much to do with an out of focus background, which is what he said. I was intending to compare the bokeh of various lenses, or look at some examples from different lenses.

Bucket's 85mm "L" has some nice bokeh. Call me a snob, but I haven't been that impressed with the bokeh examples from other lenses so far in the thread.
 
Originally posted by Stereodude
How do you figure?

I started a thread about Bokeh, I'd hope I knew what it meant. It doesn't really have that much to do with an out of focus background, which is what he said. I was intending to compare the bokeh of various lenses, or look at some examples from different lenses.

Bucket's 85mm "L" has some nice bokeh. Call me a snob, but I haven't been that impressed with the bokeh examples from other lenses so far in the thread.
Click to expand...

dude it was a joke

you seriously need to calm down

dont take everything so personally

anyway, personally i am very satisfied personally with the pics i took, especially the first one, and that was with my crappy 80-200 4.5-5.6

i dont know that much about photography, nor do i pretend to... but i am learning, so :p
 
heh i only have one lens, a tamron 28-80 f/3.5 - 5.6 so i have to work with what ive got until i can afford better.
 
P1010153.jpg


P1010284.jpg


I'm new to photography in general, so I'm not sure if these are good at all. Any suggestions?

Tim
 
Originally posted by MasterOfNone
I'm new to photography in general, so I'm not sure if these are good at all. Any suggestions?

Tim
Click to expand...
You can have a good photograph with bad bokeh. It's only 1 aspect that contributes to the end result. Boken isn't what seperates a bad picture from a good picture. It is one of the things that seperate a good lens from a great lens.
 
heres a picture i took out in my back yard. was simply messing around with the manual settings again @ ISO400 and rememberd this topic, thought i would take a pic n see how it turned out.



here it is:

IMG_14312.jpg




i also quiet like the grainy effect that the ISO gives it. i wouldnt call it noise, just grain. i just reckon its cool as :p
 
If you want to see more bad bokeh, try a 60's era Mamiya Sekor 55mm f/1.8 lens, wide open:

grandmother-web.jpg
 
Stereo

I like your outside lamp pic.

it looks cool. :cool:
 
586197-M-1.jpg

628833-M-1.jpg

Ok here are a couple for the mix. The way I understand bokeh is it is supposed to, enhance the main subject as, a highlighting backround but, not gain attention to itself. But I maybe wrong it happens.:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top