Bokeh Mania: Can It Be Stopped?

<p>Les, that's like asking about the ride in a car that's going over a bumpy road. Talking about the felt quality of the ride (by virtue of the suspension) is like talking about the bokeh. Physical properties of the car (or the lens) manifest themselves in a particular, qualitative experience that may or may not really matter. If you're on the way to the hospital to give birth, a slightly tighter or sloppier suspension may not really matter to you. If you're comparing two cars, and trying to decide which one you want to take on a long trip, or use off road, you might stop to weigh even the small differences in the suspensions.<br /><br />You can say, "was the ride bumpy, smooth, boaty, or jittery?" ... but it doesn't make much sense to ask "did riding in the car have a feel to it?" Of <em>course</em> it did. Whether or not some people care, or have the words to express the nuances of it are a separate matter. So of course there's "bokeh" in that (fantastic!) photo. But because of the focal length, distances, background, and quality of light ... the <em>qualitative nature</em> of that lens's behavior in that regard is a vanishing issue because the logistics of the shot produce <em>so much blur</em>.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"It has bokeh..."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>My brain hurts from the quantification of a quality.</p>

<p>Fair enough, Lex. That was poor writing on my part... It was also incorrect of me to say "all photos have bokeh". Bokeh is a property of the lens, not of the photo.</p>

<p>It's okay, Mark, my brain was already <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfxuR8g2qnw">boked</a> today.</p>

<p>Based on this post in another sites forum I would say the battle has been lost:<br>

</p>

<p >"Hi Canon experts!</p>

<p >I'd like to get a wide angle with really nice bokeh but dont have a lot of extra cash to spend. So for under 400 what would be good choices? I have a T1i with the kit lens. Mostly interested in taking landscape pictures if that helps.<br />thanks!"</p>

 

<p><em>wide angle...</em><br>

<em>really nice bokeh...</em><br>

<em>for landscapes...</em></p>

<p>It's a perfect conflation of bokeh and boke. Maximum density achieved. The internet is over.</p>

<p>And THAT, my friends, is what I was ranting about. "Ooh! Bokeh! Must have it!"</p>

<p>When I see a post/question like that, Les, I simply try to straighten them out. Just like I'd try to help someone who hears that they need a lens that goes to f/32 for extra sharpness on landscapes with their smaller-format camera, or who's under the impression they need to buy "digital filters" in order to achieve truly good looking portraits. It's not surprising that such ignorance or misunderstanding gives you a rash ... but I wonder if all of the other stuff that's just as bad or worse does the same?<br /><br />I see <em>far</em> more ill-informed (bordering on crazy-sounding) musing about shooting high school sports or piano recitals than I do about the B word. You want flagrantly mis-used words coupled with a huge disconnect from what really matters and why? Read the threads about copyright issues and model releases - the ones with crazy don't-get-it phrasology ("Will I need a copyright release to photograph a chef's special dessert served as part of a wine tasting event at a county fair? I don't think he was born in this country...").<br /><br />Rant away, but ... it seems a curiously low profile offense at which to raise your hackles, when there are so many more (and larger, and more real-life meaningful) to choose from. How often do you help out in the beginners forum? Check it out, for some perspective on just how minor the whole bokeh thing really is.</p>

<p>But, Matt, the internets are fueled by rant. An interweb without rant is like Monstropolis without scream.</p>

<p>Ever heard of "Mosquito Bokeh"?<br>

<a href="

<p> </p>

<p>sorry, my comp rebooted and re-posted the same text as above :/ since i cant delete the post, im hanging this text in here</p>