Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Main Photography Discussion
Amature Bokeh Question - Iron Horse
Page <<first <prev 4 of 6 next> last>>
Jul 3, 2018 15:43:10   #
srt101fan
 
Gene51 wrote:
Depth of field was deep enough and distance to the background close enough so that even a 50 mm lens at F1.8 rendered the background with less softness.

Kilroy has two options using that lens at that aperture - move closer, increasing ratio of distance to background relative to foreground, or move to another point of view where the background is further away. Focusing in front of the horse risks getting a soft horse.

Second alternative involves shooting this as a panorama, where he would move in to the distance necessary to get the background to the desired degree of softness, then take multiple overlapping images to get the right composition. I've done this a few times and it works pretty well.

Of course the elements in the image are a factor. But a lens with "poor" bokeh will rarely produce an image with smooth bokeh.

I once had a Leitz lens for my Leica III G that had such amazing bokeh it was hard to describe. Not only did it defocus smoothly, but somehow the optical engineers were able to build in a bit of contrast reduction.

The most interesting thing about this lens is that it had a 7 blade Iris with a non-circular shape. Somehow round highlights remained round and smooth-edged.
Depth of field was deep enough and distance to the... (show quote)


Thank you, Gene. I always appreciate your comments and your ability and willingness to answer a question directly.

Reply
Jul 3, 2018 16:23:30   #
DanielB Loc: San Diego, Ca
 
To elaborate further I'm attaching 2 portraits of mine with a classic bokeh background. There are other posts that have given good explanations on how a good bokeh is achieved so I won't elaborate on that.
tainkc wrote:
Do you even know what bokeh is? The background that is shown is not the type that one should be thinking of bokeh. Not one bit. Besides, bokeh is a bit over rated. It appears best when it is a happy accident even though good bokeh is achieved with experience. Try finding an object that you would like to practice bokeh with. The background should be full of round objects (berries on a bush for example) just to begin with. In addition Google photos with bokeh and you will get a better understanding of what I am talking about.
Do you even know what bokeh is? The background th... (show quote)

My son Colin
My son Colin...
(Download)

The beautiful and talented Katie S
The beautiful and talented Katie S...
(Download)

Reply
Jul 3, 2018 16:29:40   #
DanielB Loc: San Diego, Ca
 
Agree! I Think Killroy's photo was quite nice actually - specially the 2nd.
CaptainPhoto wrote:
KillroyII is a new member and just trying to learn. Why are you being such a jerk about answering his question. Lighten up - try to be more helpful.

Reply
 
 
Jul 3, 2018 16:30:16   #
Angel Star Photography Loc: Tacoma, WA
 
tainkc wrote:
Do you even know what bokeh is? The background that is shown is not the type that one should be thinking of bokeh. Not one bit. Besides, bokeh is a bit over rated. It appears best when it is a happy accident even though good bokeh is achieved with experience. Try finding an object that you would like to practice bokeh with. The background should be full of round objects (berries on a bush for example) just to begin with. In addition Google photos with bokeh and you will get a better understanding of what I am talking about.
Do you even know what bokeh is? The background th... (show quote)


The objects in the background do not need to be round nor does the bokeh need to be round. It is more about the blurring of the background to create an artistic, aesthetically pleasing, and interesting composition. If you want round, blurred objects, you can control that with distance to subject, lighting, angle, and aperture. The latter depends much on the lens construction (specifically, the diaphragm construction) and the f-stop used. You will also see from my previous post under, "And just for fun...", that some photographers will create bokeh with a variety of shapes.

To my point, here is a shot that I took which I found interesting. On the right, the background contained a bush with yellow-green leaves, the pink/purple is a Lilac bush and below is a gray, worn fence. The yellow across the top are bushes with green leaves reflecting the sunlight. The blue in the center is a house of bluish gray color. The reddish-orange item on the left is the upper corner of the taillight lens of a 2015 Chrysler Town and Country. The green in the middle and to the left is small, lemon cypress evergreen tree. No round objects were in the background.

The time of day was about an hour and a half before sunset and the sun was behind me. The lens was a Canon 20-105mm, f4L. Lens setting was 95mm at f/11 and the flower was close to the minimum focus distance of the lens. ISO 1250, no flash.

C. R. Smith (Charles)
Angel Star Photography
www.angelstarphotography.com

Taken with a 24-105mm, f4L. 95mm, f/11. Subject close to lens minimum focus distance.
Taken with a 24-105mm, f4L. 95mm, f/11. Subject cl...
(Download)

Reply
Jul 3, 2018 16:35:31   #
kymarto Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy
 
Just for fun, let me give you some examples of the varying quality of bokeh shot with some vintage lenses. Modern lenses are mostly all plain vanilla when it comes to bokeh.

Persommons shot with Dallmeyer Super Six Anastigmat 220mm f2.0
Persommons shot with Dallmeyer Super Six Anastigma...
(Download)

Aires Coral 4.5cm f1.5
Aires Coral 4.5cm f1.5...
(Download)

P. Angenieux Type 65 projection lens 85mm f1.4
P. Angenieux Type 65 projection lens 85mm f1.4...
(Download)

Erhu player--P. Angenieux Type 86 projection lens 95mm f1.2
Erhu player--P. Angenieux Type 86 projection lens ...
(Download)

P. Angenieux Type 86 projection lens 95mm f1.2
P. Angenieux Type 86 projection lens 95mm f1.2...
(Download)

P. Angenieux Type 86 projection lens 95mm f1.2
P. Angenieux Type 86 projection lens 95mm f1.2...
(Download)

Pentax Auto Takumar 35mm f2.3
Pentax Auto Takumar 35mm f2.3...
(Download)

Kodak Ektar 47mm f2.0
Kodak Ektar 47mm f2.0...
(Download)

Chinese worker--Cosina 55mm f1.2
Chinese worker--Cosina 55mm f1.2...
(Download)

Zoomatar75mm f1.3
Zoomatar75mm f1.3...
(Download)

Reply
Jul 3, 2018 16:39:32   #
DanielB Loc: San Diego, Ca
 
LOL - probably is a band out there with that name.
Gene51 wrote:
Or just Pointless Balls. . .

Reply
Jul 3, 2018 16:46:39   #
DanielB Loc: San Diego, Ca
 
Maybe you and your conceited remarks should be taken out back of the woodshed. I don't think one post said that Bokeh was there primary objective when shooting a photo. KillroyII simply asked how to achieve a better result.
garygrafic wrote:
Bokeh?.............All of you who do nothing but talk about "improving bokeh", trying for better bokeh, anyone that makes bokeh their prime reason for shooting, all of you, and you know who you are,
should be taken behind the woodshed and be given a good spanking and also have their mouthes washed out with soap. If you get up in the morning, full of energy, creative juices flowing and say to yourself "today I'm going to shoot some fabulous bokeh!"............the woodshed for you. Think of what goes on in FRONT of the bokeh first and foremost. If the subject interests you but the background is crap think "perhaps I'd better shoot wide open rather than f:16? Maybe the 85 rather than the 35, perhaps move in tighter. All these will throw the background out of focus. Think of bokeh a bonus, a gift, if it's there and looks interesting AND the subject is dynamite, consider yourself a very, very talented photographer. I cannot think of a single photographer whose legacy was bokeh. Ernst Haas did beautiful stuff, the subject came 1st, bull fighter, blur, bokeh. Tell me of a photographer whose legacy is bokeh. Am I wrong?
Bokeh?.............All of you who do nothing but t... (show quote)

Reply
 
 
Jul 3, 2018 16:57:39   #
aellman Loc: Boston MA
 
tainkc wrote:
Do you even know what bokeh is? The background that is shown is not the type that one should be thinking of bokeh. Not one bit. Besides, bokeh is a bit over rated. It appears best when it is a happy accident even though good bokeh is achieved with experience. Try finding an object that you would like to practice bokeh with. The background should be full of round objects (berries on a bush for example) just to begin with. In addition Google photos with bokeh and you will get a better understanding of what I am talking about.
Do you even know what bokeh is? The background th... (show quote)



Call it by whatever name you like. IMHO, this is a successful example
(not a happy accident, the concept of which is ridiculous). >Alan



Reply
Jul 3, 2018 17:18:00   #
KillroyII Loc: Middle Georgia
 
tainkc wrote:
Do you even know what bokeh is? The background that is shown is not the type that one should be thinking of bokeh. Not one bit. Besides, bokeh is a bit over rated. It appears best when it is a happy accident even though good bokeh is achieved with experience. Try finding an object that you would like to practice bokeh with. The background should be full of round objects (berries on a bush for example) just to begin with. In addition Google photos with bokeh and you will get a better understanding of what I am talking about.
Do you even know what bokeh is? The background th... (show quote)


Thanks tainkc… looks like that is what I was looking for

Reply
Jul 3, 2018 17:21:01   #
KillroyII Loc: Middle Georgia
 
GoofyNewfie wrote:
You mean depth of field.
Bokeh is a different matter- it’s about the quality of the out of focus areas, of the quantity.- best seen in out of focus highlights.
There is an on-line depth of field calculator you can use here:
http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html


Thanks GoofyNewfie… that will help and it is what I was trying to find

Reply
Jul 3, 2018 17:24:31   #
KillroyII Loc: Middle Georgia
 
lamiaceae wrote:
I think anyone interested in Bokeh should read through this Web Page https://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2013/09/11/understanding-bokeh-the-art-and-science-behind-the-beauty-of-blur-part-1 and look at the examples. None are extreme creating an image that is bokeh made out of out of focus light sources as light balls as more as an effect than a help to the real subject of the image. If you Google "bokeh" you will get tons of pointless balls of light.


Thanks, lamiacease, I will read the artivle

Reply
 
 
Jul 3, 2018 17:27:02   #
KillroyII Loc: Middle Georgia
 
DanielB wrote:
Agree! I Think Killroy's photo was quite nice actually - specially the 2nd.


thank you DanielB

Reply
Jul 3, 2018 17:30:31   #
KillroyII Loc: Middle Georgia
 
garygrafic wrote:
Bokeh?.............All of you who do nothing but talk about "improving bokeh", trying for better bokeh, anyone that makes bokeh their prime reason for shooting, all of you, and you know who you are,
should be taken behind the woodshed and be given a good spanking and also have their mouthes washed out with soap. If you get up in the morning, full of energy, creative juices flowing and say to yourself "today I'm going to shoot some fabulous bokeh!"............the woodshed for you. Think of what goes on in FRONT of the bokeh first and foremost. If the subject interests you but the background is crap think "perhaps I'd better shoot wide open rather than f:16? Maybe the 85 rather than the 35, perhaps move in tighter. All these will throw the background out of focus. Think of bokeh a bonus, a gift, if it's there and looks interesting AND the subject is dynamite, consider yourself a very, very talented photographer. I cannot think of a single photographer whose legacy was bokeh. Ernst Haas did beautiful stuff, the subject came 1st, bull fighter, blur, bokeh. Tell me of a photographer whose legacy is bokeh. Am I wrong?
Bokeh?.............All of you who do nothing but t... (show quote)


Your words, "If the subject interests you but the background is crap" were in my mind when I stopped to take the picture. I wanted a picture of the horse but not to have it distracted by the gas station, etc. in the background

Reply
Jul 3, 2018 17:33:08   #
KillroyII Loc: Middle Georgia
 
Angel Star Photography wrote:
The first one has potential. The second one is a good start and I believe this subject may lend itself to some good practice. If you can return to this location, I recommend that you try from different distances and angles. Pay attention to your background while maintaining focus on the subject. In particular, note how the background reflects the light---in this case, the sun---and its intensity. Know the construction of your lens or lenses and try to understand the potentials for possibly creating a bokeh background. Some lens will not do so well whereas others will be impressive and then some will be interesting. Get out there and experiment with lighting, angle, distance, lenses, apertures, and have fun with what you create in your images.

Here is a good write-up of bokeh, the history, and why it happens. Understanding the latter will help guide you into your approach. Also in the article are examples and I think you will find them interesting as they are not what many perceive bokeh to be. I know it was certainly a surprise to me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bokeh

Here is a video that you may find helpful and inspiring. This guy can be entertaining at times.

https://youtu.be/PQNyu74Jd6U

And just for fun...

https://youtu.be/H5jjr_vKruU
The first one has potential. The second one is a ... (show quote)


Thanks Angel Star... I will return with other lenses and look at your URLs

Reply
Jul 3, 2018 17:37:21   #
KillroyII Loc: Middle Georgia
 
Gene51 wrote:
Depth of field was deep enough and distance to the background close enough so that even a 50 mm lens at F1.8 rendered the background with less softness.

Kilroy has two options using that lens at that aperture - move closer, increasing ratio of distance to background relative to foreground, or move to another point of view where the background is further away. Focusing in front of the horse risks getting a soft horse.

Second alternative involves shooting this as a panorama, where he would move in to the distance necessary to get the background to the desired degree of softness, then take multiple overlapping images to get the right composition. I've done this a few times and it works pretty well.

Of course the elements in the image are a factor. But a lens with "poor" bokeh will rarely produce an image with smooth bokeh.

I once had a Leitz lens for my Leica III G that had such amazing bokeh it was hard to describe. Not only did it defocus smoothly, but somehow the optical engineers were able to build in a bit of contrast reduction.

The most interesting thing about this lens is that it had a 7 blade Iris with a non-circular shape. Somehow round highlights remained round and smooth-edged.
Depth of field was deep enough and distance to the... (show quote)


Thanks Gene51

Reply
Page <<first <prev 4 of 6 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.