Definition of bokeh, simply gibberish?

Started 6 months ago | Discussions thread
Marcos Villaroman
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,238Gear list
Like?
Re: Definition of bokeh, simply gibberish?
In reply to guitarjeff, 6 months ago

guitarjeff wrote:

bigpigbig wrote:

guitarjeff wrote:

Dave Luttmann wrote:

What a long post about something you don't understand or grasp.

And I notice you offer no explanation for your statement, noted. And long post? I have seen far far longer.

Put simply, like it or not, bokeh, IS the quality of the out of focus areas.'

Wrong. Like it or not, 2 plus 2 DOES NOT equal 5. Your statement has no meaning. If it IS the quality, then define that quality for me? YOU CAN'T

You cannot measure bokeh quantitatively in a way that everyone would come up with the exact same value if performing the measurement the same --- without defining how you want to measure it, with what tools, and in such a way that it is not subjective.

Then again:  Photography is more an expression of ART than science for a lot of people with camera and lens tools to achieve artistic vision or expression.

Bokeh is a term to help identify a characteristic of an image or lens that you are talking about.

There are several aspects to bokeh that make it more or less desirable.

To you, or to many? If I like it, and you don't, does that mean there is MORE bokeh for me and less for you? Is it subjective?

Yes. Like art and what people like/don't like about art, it is definitely subjective.

It has NOTHING to do with how out of focus something is. Only the quality of the blur circles (that might not even be circular, but that is another story).

I never said it had anything to do with the amount of blur. The amount of blur is only one QUALITY of the blur, some may like more, some may like less, amount has nothing to do with it's actual existence. If bokeh is a THING, then it is definable with concrete parameters, if it is subjective, then it's not definable.

Revisit your definition of a "thing".  Bokeh as used in photography labels characteristic of an image or characteristics of a lens design.  Before you can measure something like "quality" of x in such a fashion that people can measure it the same way or get the exact same value, you have to define what you are measuring and how.  That doesn't keep people from using the word quality in a phrase that communicates constructive meaning to others.

Here's the thing:  If I said a lens had "good, smooth bokeh as opposed to harsh looking bokeh" and toss in a couple of examples, a lot of people would know what I'm talking about.  If someone said a lens "emphasized good bokeh over sharpness", that too would have constructive meaning.

Bokeh characteristic is a strong consideration in lens design and is not meaningless gibberish.

 Marcos Villaroman's gear list:Marcos Villaroman's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm X-T1 Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM +39 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow