A question about the "B" word

[tom h.]

Sorry, I'm not getting it. Of the three shots shown above (not

including Kellys "demos") I like Pauls the best (All good shots,

tho) because the composition appeals to me- It didn't even occur

to me to judge them on their out of focus backgrounds.

 

Tom

[kelly_flanigan1]

The three photos of the tree have no composition as a photo. The tree simply holds the lens resolution test chart; the focused point of the lens. I purposely had 3 dimensional items in the out of focus areas; to see how they look when out of focus. We did this simple test about 3 decades ago; for motion picture lenses...... The Russian Elmar clone has excellent "out of focus" qualities; the Summicron 50mm F2 very good; and then Canon 50mm F1.2 very poor/harse "out of focus" qualities..............This "out of focus" qualities of certain lenses has been known for at least before World War 2; in the movie industry....BUT has been coined "Bokeh" in the last decade or so; for an ancient quality of lenses................This is like someone in Miami learning that there is more than one type of snow; and placing it on the web; as a new found thing......To an Canadian; they will think the guy in Miami is nuts for not knowing there are many types of snow. <BR><BR>A South Carolina film instructor went into good and poor "out of focus" qualities at a seminar 35 years ago.....<BR><BR><b>Good "out of focus" propertiesp lets the observer identify the object; even when well blurred....BUT doesnt let the observer dwell on weird donnuts; batwings; non natural looking backgrounds; that will distract the movie viewer from the movie's theme..........

[kelly_flanigan1]

<b>composition </b>has nothing to do with "out of focus" qualities of a lens......

[moiz]

Wow. I didn't expect so many responses when I got back to work!

 

Thanks to everyone who has replied. I'm going to respectfully disagree with those that say boke(h) isnt important. Every part of a photograph is important....i'm not saying its make or break, but its part of the final image so the better it is better the image....well, maybe. Everything is so subjective isnt it!!

 

I'll be honest and say that I have never examined the bokeh on any of my prints. I have enough problems getting the part of the image that is important in focus without worrying about the already out of focus bits....but then again...maybe if I had better bokeh lenses, the bits I'd failed to get in focus correctly would look nicer :)

 

moiz

[Guest]

</B>Moiz, you've been on photo.net two years and you thought no one would have an opinion about bokeh on the Leica forum? ;-)

[moiz]

I thought it was such a overly dicussed subject that it mst have gone beyond saturation and that people were so sick of talking about it that i didnt even want to mention the word in my subject line. I figured i'd have to lure them in with a bit of vagueness!

 

My question was purely techinical....just something that struck me as I was cleaning my lens the other night. Having read some of the links i didnt realise how much the OOF highlights take on the shape of the iris. I have a 50mm Optema(?) lens at home that I got with my first enlarger. That has 4 aperture blades....a square iris when stopped down. Im going to have to get that onto a camera and see what square highlights look like!!! :)

[kelly_flanigan1]

Moiz; my goofy tree shots are all wide open; thus the iris blade issue is not part of the mix with these shots...... I enjoy the "B" discussions; and get a kick when they are thought to be a brand new thing....

[mike dixon]

Someone on this forum (don't remember who) once made the memorable statement, "Leica users flock to bokeh questions like sharks to chum."

[moiz]

Its funny now i think about it. I dont even have a Leica (though I have just bought an Olympus RD so I'm on the first rung of the ladder) yet I posted this question in the Leica forum. My sub-conscience has some answering to do!!!

[kelly_flanigan1]

Moiz; movies tend to use lenses with "good out of focus properties" ; the American Society of Cinematographers has a magazine called the "American Cinematographer"....Typical tests for good "B" are that an object appear identifyable in the put of focus areas; and NOT distract from the main subject/story with weird artifacts. This is old hat in the movie business; and new to many on the net ; who act like it is a newly discovered thing.....Look at the out of focus areas in good movies; I always am thinking which lens and camera was used; and what lighting was used too.... <BR><BR>In a "disturbing scene" portion of a movie; a lens with bad "B" is sometimes used; which adds to the confusion of who is lurking in the background; and ADDS to the effect one wants to creat.................In a like matter; harsh or soft lighting is used at times; warm or cold lighting is used at times.