high magnification and the background well out of the way (or devoid of any high contrast areas and specular highlights). Note that almost any lens can produce smooth bokeh in “easy” conditions, e.g. the out-of-focus areas remain safely out of the way. This is preferable in a general-purpose lens because the bokeh will not steal the attention in a shot, i.e. Most lenses have some of these at any given setting, but can still be considered as having “good” bokeh if the result is a creamy, non-distracting background. In theory, “good bokeh” generally refers to very smooth bokeh, optimally without distracting swirliness, visible aperture shape, edges brighter than centre, double-lined edges, or colour artefacts (longitudinal chromatic aberration). "Good" bokeh doesn't swirl because the circles are round, swirly bokeh can look amazing but it swirls around the centre of the lens so if you crop the side off a swirly photo it is likely to look odd.Īrkku wrote: In practice bokeh is good if it works for the picture. Sometimes "bad" bokeh gives a very interesting effect, sometimes it doesn't. This would be "good bokeh" in a technical sense.Īs for the real world, it's a matter of preference.
![film bokeh what is it film bokeh what is it](https://images.mubicdn.net/images/film/151530/cache-130274-1598047225/image-w1280.jpg)
PaulC wrote: I understand that what the lens manufacturers are striving for is bokeh circles that are circular rather than elliptical, and as far as possible are evenly illuminated without bright edges or central spots. Katastrofo wrote: Good bokeh you can spread on toast, smooth and creamy, not that youĬan't use Martin's bokeh, but that is more of a marmalade. Personal forum activity on pause every now and again (due to job obligations)!Ĭarsten = "KAPCTEH" = "Karusutenu" | T-shirt?.My photos from Emilia: THIS is perfect bokeh in my eyes! If bokeh is meant to be pleasant and creamy. The quality of "bokeh" depends on how the photo is used, on what it is meant to express. LucisPictor wrote: I really like poilu's example, because it works well in this scene.Ī completely blurred bg there would not have been as nice. CZJ Biotar ALU M42 2/58 CZJ Tessar ALU M42 2.8/50ĬZJ DDR Flektogon Zebra M42 2.8/35 CZJ Pancolar M42 2/50 CZJ Pancolar Exakta 2/50Īuto Mamiya/Sekor 1.8/55. Here is a great explanation by Orio about bokeh.įuji XE-1,Pentax K-01,Panasonic G1,Panasonic G5,Pentax MXĪuto Rikenon's 55/1.4, 1.8, 2.8. There is smooth bokeh which is "good" bokeh or crazy background bokeh which can be called "bad" bokeh.my 2 cents worth. Mo wrote: I think "good" V "bad" is depending on who is viewing it at the time. Location: Oberhessen, Germany / Maidstone ('95-'96) What I hadn't seen though, was the followup link at the bottom to HERE, which explains a lot more. Posted: Sun 7:57 am Post subject: Re: Wat is "good bokeh?Ī useful link, which I had seen before. Posted: Sun 7:47 am Post subject: Re: Wat is "good bokeh? "I don't like the donut bokeh" is also easily appreciated.īut what is "good" bokeh? Is it purely subjective? If someone says that "the bokeh is a bit busy" then I can at least see what they mean. Having been advised of the definition of the word, I then nodded sagely whenever I saw a post that raved about how good was the bokeh in a particular shot. But what are generally considered to be the attributes of "good" (or "bad") bokeh?Īs a newb and less than capable photographer I didn't even know what bokeh was.
![film bokeh what is it film bokeh what is it](https://i2.wp.com/lava360.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Bokeh-Photography-Examples-and-Tips4.jpg)
If anyone can point me elsewhere, I'll delete this post.Ī lot of posts on this and other forum talk about "good" bokeh. This has probably been asked before, but I can't find it.
![film bokeh what is it film bokeh what is it](https://filmphotography.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/hanalogital-bokeh-bnv.jpg)
Posted: Sun 7:30 am Post subject: What is "good bokeh?