too much bokeh ?
Jun 7, 2013 00:38:09 #
Jun 7, 2013 00:44:33 #
The flower in your photo, which I assume is the subject, is overexposed.
If that's your subject, get closer to it.
I love selective focus shots.
Try again, only closer and expose it properly.
Too much Bokeh?
Bokeh isn't measured in amount.
It's a quality, not a quantity.
Smooth, creamy, swirling, distracting ( as in the out of focus donut-shaped highlights you get when you use a mirror lens) are words to describe bokeh.
Bokeh is fine when addressing the blur quality, but not for shallow depth of field, narrow or selective focus, which you have in your photo.
If bokeh were only about the depth of field, why then would Nikon or Minolta make lenses specifically to adjust bokeh if all you had to do is adjust the aperture ring?
More here on the subject:
http://kurtmunger.com/bokeh_samplerid22.html
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2010/02/11/what-is-bokeh/
If that's your subject, get closer to it.
I love selective focus shots.
Try again, only closer and expose it properly.
Too much Bokeh?
Bokeh isn't measured in amount.
It's a quality, not a quantity.
Smooth, creamy, swirling, distracting ( as in the out of focus donut-shaped highlights you get when you use a mirror lens) are words to describe bokeh.
Bokeh is fine when addressing the blur quality, but not for shallow depth of field, narrow or selective focus, which you have in your photo.
If bokeh were only about the depth of field, why then would Nikon or Minolta make lenses specifically to adjust bokeh if all you had to do is adjust the aperture ring?
More here on the subject:
http://kurtmunger.com/bokeh_samplerid22.html
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2010/02/11/what-is-bokeh/
Jun 7, 2013 01:31:32 #
mwsilvers
Loc: Central New Jersey
unanchored wrote:
om-2 - 50mm reversed - hand held
Yeah, it looks light more of an exposure or lighting issue.
Jun 7, 2013 02:20:54 #
unanchored wrote:
om-2 - 50mm reversed - hand held
Unanchored, I don't think you have enough bokeh. The background is still too visible and is very distracting and very harsh. Were you already wide open? I don't know anything about using lenses reversed, so don't know if you have any other choice.
Get in tight and isolate the shot more. That will also(usually) give you more bokeh. Good luck
Jun 7, 2013 06:17:06 #
Bokah is way overrated. It should not even be mentioned in amateur photography books in my opinion. I think sharpshooter is right about one thing; the background blur is not enough. Even if the exposure were spot on, the background as it is would take away from the main subject. I was drawn to the background first, then the flower. Which the author of this post is concerned about.
The distance from the camera to the subject is all wrong in addition to the aperture being incorrect. See, GoofyNewfie? I'm lernin!
The distance from the camera to the subject is all wrong in addition to the aperture being incorrect. See, GoofyNewfie? I'm lernin!
Jun 7, 2013 06:27:44 #
tainkc wrote:
Bokah is way overrated. It should not even be mentioned in amateur photography books in my opinion.
The distance from the camera to the subject is all wrong in addition to the aperture being incorrect. See, GoofyNewfie? I'm lernin!
The distance from the camera to the subject is all wrong in addition to the aperture being incorrect. See, GoofyNewfie? I'm lernin!
Yes!!!!!
Jun 7, 2013 13:35:14 #
thank you all for the replies - as for distance that was determined by where I could find focas - by lense reversed I mean - took lense off turned it around and put it against the mounting area - I suspect this is what free lensing is but not sure
Jun 7, 2013 14:10:14 #
I am fairly new to the site and my camera. I took this at my Mother's house a few months ago, and thought it didn't come out too bad.
Jun 7, 2013 14:56:05 #
Jun 7, 2013 15:00:36 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.