Definition of bokeh, simply gibberish?

Started Mar 6, 2014 | Discussions thread
OP guitarjeff Senior Member • Posts: 1,165
Re: You are on the right tracks ...good questions

KariP wrote:

guitarjeff wrote:

.......What is the definitive moment we/some talk about , the thing that "makes" the image something - or something special

I admire for example Cartier-Bresson and Doisneau - and many others. That is very subjective - i have not found any proofs based on some/any measurable criteria.

Great example. It is valuable to you subjectively, no way to have a definition of what that value is that everyone could measure and agree on, so the other side can't mean "Is the quality" in this way, or they would be admitting that it exist only in the mind. Yet when we ask them to define it in the real world for all to agree on all they can do is gives qualities/descriptions of differing kinds of blur, which is all still, BLUR. If bokeh is anything beyond blur they should be able to give a concrete set of parametrs that explain what is is for all and it would clearly show it is something MORE than blur, but they can't, which makes the so called definition nothing but gibberish.

......Here a guy tries to find an answer with a psychological method, in a rather long essay :

Photographic Psychology: The Decisive Moment

You are close !

Paintings like Mona Lisa - they are just paint on canvas. Some people say there is something else. Their opinions are just subjective gibberish

Agree for some, not the last. Somone's opinion is subjective, but not gibberish. They are not putting their opinion out there AS A DEFINITION. The other folks are putting out a so-called definition that makes no sense or tries to imply that bokeh is something other than blur.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow