tramsey Loc: Texas

I hate this forum. I've said it before and I'll say it again. I hate this forum. Two reasons: First, It's addictive. I'm sure you all understand what I'm taking about so I won't explain. Second, A lot of years ago I bought a camera that I thought I could handle. I took all kinds of pictures, grand kids, flowers, at the zoo, etc, etc, etc. Perfectly happy. then I ran across this forum and saw all the really, really sharp photos. All of a sudden mine didn't look so good. I posted a couple and got blasted. That's fine. I was told my focus was off several feet from the subject and my compostion was nonexsitent and several other things. That's good. MWAC told me in no uncertain terms, GET OFF P(program,automatic). Hey that's scary!
Things are coming along and now I'm trying to get good bokeh, blur out the background. Unable to accomplish this. What am I doing wrong? All the pictures were taken with a bridge camera a Lumex DMC FZ 20. (I said a lot of years ago)

#1 F 2.8
1/640

#2 F3.7
1/400

#3 F2.8
1/25

I have a thick skin so don't spare the horse power. I want to know why my bokeh stinks

snowbear

Your backdrops (the wall or fence in #1 and #2, leaves and ground in #3) may be too close to the subject. I understand the degree of bokeh (the soft circles rendered in an OOF background) depends on lens design as well as large apertures.

sarge69 Loc: Ft Myers, FL

I second the thought maybe your backgrounds are too close for the aperture.

Do a same picture as #2 but change only the F-Stop. Start low and work up maybe or reverse. have your background same distance is all and look at background. You'll get it.

Me....My eyes fool me on focus so I don't complain when one is in focus. LOL

Stick around and yes, it's addictive. I spend at least 2 to 3 cups of slowly sipped coffee in here each day learning stuff.

Sarge

tramsey Loc: Texas

The distance from the subject to the background (an old empty tin shed that I'm tearing down) is a little over six feet. #3 the leaves aren't far at all, just a matter of inches. I thought for bokeh you use f2.8 or lower and than use you meter for shutter speed, I'll try your suggestions, Thanks

English_Wolf Loc: Near Pensacola, FL

Reasons for bad bokeh...
- Digital cameras do not interpret the light diffusion the same way film did, that is the biggest impediment.
- The lens is part of the equation. One needs a relatively narrow depth of field to create 'good bokeh' (hate that Japanese name)
- The diaphragm mechanism is another player as the smoothness of the effect depend directly with the number of blades used (the more the better)
- Not all backgrounds are usable for... arghhh... bokeh
- The relation between the subject and the background is also at play, the furthest the better BUT this does not mean you need to be a mile away from something to get something, it just mean that there is a need for minimal/optimal distance to get a 'satisfying' bokeh...

Now that you made me type this word so many time you owe me.

I'll post some references and readings on the subject in a short while.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bokeh
http://www.digital-photography-school.com/how-to-achieve-better-bokeh-4-simple-tips

I did not find the reference back onto the digital interpretation of bokeh. It had to do with the blurring filter that takes place at the sensor level (to avoid moire effect).

English_Wolf Loc: Near Pensacola, FL

Looking at the data you gave, I have to assume you used a point of focus on the object/flower.

Now Depth of field is precise: 1/3 in from of the focus point and 2/3 behind. This means that you can use the full field and stay in focus (albeit soft toward the extremes). This implies a new use of DOF and focusing. You change your focus point so that field of sharpness uses the second third, behind the focus point.

"." is the focus point
1.23 .23 are in focus, reducing the bokeh field
1.23 3 replaces the focus point

Aligned to have a visual clue:
    1.23
1.23

The result is that the real focusing is before the object.

English_Wolf Loc: Near Pensacola, FL

Test suggestion:

Use a dark background with holes in it. Install a light behind. Shoot the garden wharves in front of it.

tramsey Loc: Texas

Sorry about the long delay. My wife just had another episode, don't know what else to call it. Looks and acts like a heart attack but isn't. Had to take her to the hospital and now I'm back to get some things for her. Don't know how long I'm going to be gone.

The info sounds good, haven't read or heard anything like that before. I'm going to try it and soon as I'm able.
Thanks again.
I owe you big time,

English_Wolf Loc: Near Pensacola, FL

Well, take care of yourself first as you will need to stay in good health for her.

I hope for the both of you that her condition improves.

photogrl57 Loc: Tennessee

Try using the largest aperture (smallest number) and zoom in so you are using a longer focal length. A longer focal length will blur just about everything but your focal point. .. giving shallow depth of field

rockdog Loc: Berkeley, Ca.

Great posts Wolf, you can be so good, when you are good.

rockdog Loc: Berkeley, Ca.

Carl A Loc: Homosassa FL

MMMMm Just wondering what is bokeh.
It is basically refering to the aesthetic qualty
of the blur prodced from a shot with a shallow
depth of field. I am right ?

English_Wolf Loc: Near Pensacola, FL

Basically yes. The idea is to exploit the background in order to create small circles (called circles of diffusion, or Bokeh). You can see examples on the Wikipedia link (above).

These circles are what makes the blur, they are just not distinctive. 'Bokeh' uses the lens diffraction (now a capability) due to parasite light sources and usually unwanted guests in a picture.

photocat Loc: Atlanta, Ga

Just another piece of this puzzle, sensor size. The smaller the sensor the less dramatic the bokeh even when the aperture is wide open.

This is one of those items that is really equipment driven.
Also the reason many people will pay $800 for a Zeiss "nify 50", the quality of lens plus the size of the sensor equal better boken (better being a personal opinion)