Bokeh or not?

[Buckster]

if you're using Photoshop....you already have a program that can do it. its not a 'dedicated' bokeh program...assuming you use anything beyond Lightroom to do your edits you can create a fake sense of bokeh but really its just blurring the background. it wont look anywhere near the real thing

Exactly, a blur with photoshop looks totally different. Example:

The settings in the aperture shot gave the lighting on the tower more brightness, and there's even a slightly different white balance that took that light from a magenta to a red, so it's tough to really compare the two in a true apples-to-apples way. Still, at least a better attempt could have been made in Photoshop, IMHO. I used the lens blur tool:

Don't get me wrong - I agree that nothing beats the natural aperture use for a great bokeh, but in a pinch, Photoshop can be used to achieve quite a bit, and most people would never detect it's a fake.

 

[Dikkie]

You're such a partypooper
Didn't know that you could do thát with photoshop. Anyway, it's too much work (for me) to photoshop these things afterwards, than that your lens can do it at the time pushing the release button on your camera.

Maybe others won't happen to see, but I can see clearly that this one is a fake right here, because the sharp lines of the moving train are bold aswel. While when shooting this picture with a high aperture, the shutter goes faster and the lines are not visible (see picture bottom left).

 

[Buckster]

You're such a partypooper

LOL! Somebody's gotta do it!

Didn't know that you could do thát with photoshop.

Always good to learn more about one's tools.

Anyway, it's too much work (for me) to photoshop these things afterwards, than that your lens can do it at the time pushing the release button on your camera.

Like I said, when in a pinch. Also, the point was that it can be done in post, not that it should.

Maybe others won't happen to see, but I can see clearly that this one is a fake right here, because the sharp lines of the moving train are bold aswel.

I'll boldy suggest that you only know it's a fake because you already know it's a fake, not because there's evidence of it in the processing. Nobody but you even knows it IS a moving train (because you were there), let alone how far away it is or whether it should be focal blurred or to what degree.

While when shooting this picture with a high aperture, the shutter goes faster and the lines are not visible (see picture bottom left).

Again, you were there, so only you know what it is and whether it should be moving or not. Unfortunately for your theory, in a night shot like this, apertures are usually not wide enough to stop the motion of a moving train, and therefore light would still leave a streak, so it's expected, and not evidence of a fake, and that's even if the viewer had any clue that it was a moving train.

I think you're just making up excuses at this point.

 

[ecphoto]

You're such a partypooper

LOL! Somebody's gotta do it!

Didn't know that you could do thát with photoshop.

Always good to learn more about one's tools.

Like I said, when in a pinch. Also, the point was that it can be done in post, not that it should.

Maybe others won't happen to see, but I can see clearly that this one is a fake right here, because the sharp lines of the moving train are bold aswel.

I'll boldy suggest that you only know it's a fake because you already know it's a fake, not because there's evidence of it in the processing. Nobody but you even knows it IS a moving train (because you were there), let alone how far away it is or whether it should be focal blurred or to what degree.

While when shooting this picture with a high aperture, the shutter goes faster and the lines are not visible (see picture bottom left).

Again, you were there, so only you know what it is and whether it should be moving or not. Unfortunately for your theory, in a night shot like this, apertures are usually not wide enough to stop the motion of a moving train, and therefore light would still leave a streak, so it's expected, and not evidence of a fake, and that's even if the viewer had any clue that it was a moving train.

I think you're just making up excuses at this point.

Thanks Buck

 

[daarksun]

Don't waste money on a prime if your on a budget. Get the canon 50mm f1.8 for a great bokeh, if that is what you want. The lens is very sharp and around $100. Learn to take great pictures with the cheap lenses. A prime lens will make a ****ty photography take great ****ty images. Learn the camera, how to use the lenses and learn composition. If you can take the most beautiful pictures but the composition sucks then the photograph sucks.

Prime lenses are really for the guy who's making a living off of his photography. It's not for the weekend photo warrior, or someone trying to learn to get better at the craft. Not for the guy taking photos of his kids birthday parties. The cost comes in when you want a fast lens and you can get those without purchasing a prime lens. Use the prime lens money to get more lenses that cost less.

With the cheap and free software today that is what you need to learn. How to use a photoshop, photoimpact or photopaint program and get some plugins from a serif, topaz, machinery hd effects or others. These aid you with cropping photos, enhancing the colors, sharpness, hue, saturation and so on.

Spend the money you have wisely. Prime lenses for amatuers is not... unless you have money to throw at the craft. Good luck with your photography.

 

[o hey tyler]

Don't waste money on a prime if your on a budget. Get the canon 50mm f1.8 for a great bokeh, if that is what you want. The lens is very sharp and around $100. Learn to take great pictures with the cheap lenses. A prime lens will make a ****ty photography take great ****ty images. Learn the camera, how to use the lenses and learn composition. If you can take the most beautiful pictures but the composition sucks then the photograph sucks.

Prime lenses are really for the guy who's making a living off of his photography. It's not for the weekend photo warrior, or someone trying to learn to get better at the craft. Not for the guy taking photos of his kids birthday parties. The cost comes in when you want a fast lens and you can get those without purchasing a prime lens. Use the prime lens money to get more lenses that cost less.

With the cheap and free software today that is what you need to learn. How to use a photoshop, photoimpact or photopaint program and get some plugins from a serif, topaz, machinery hd effects or others. These aid you with cropping photos, enhancing the colors, sharpness, hue, saturation and so on.

Spend the money you have wisely. Prime lenses for amatuers is not... unless you have money to throw at the craft. Good luck with your photography.

Saying the Canon 50mm f1.8 has "great Bokeh" is just totally false. You get what you pay for, and prime lenses are not specifically geared towards people making an income on photography. You have some pretty far out ideas.

 

[CaptainWolfe]

Don't waste money on a prime if your on a budget. Get the canon 50mm f1.8 for a great bokeh, if that is what you want. The lens is very sharp and around $100. Learn to take great pictures with the cheap lenses. A prime lens will make a ****ty photography take great ****ty images. Learn the camera, how to use the lenses and learn composition. If you can take the most beautiful pictures but the composition sucks then the photograph sucks.

Prime lenses are really for the guy who's making a living off of his photography. It's not for the weekend photo warrior, or someone trying to learn to get better at the craft. Not for the guy taking photos of his kids birthday parties. The cost comes in when you want a fast lens and you can get those without purchasing a prime lens. Use the prime lens money to get more lenses that cost less.

With the cheap and free software today that is what you need to learn. How to use a photoshop, photoimpact or photopaint program and get some plugins from a serif, topaz, machinery hd effects or others. These aid you with cropping photos, enhancing the colors, sharpness, hue, saturation and so on.

Spend the money you have wisely. Prime lenses for amatuers is not... unless you have money to throw at the craft. Good luck with your photography.

I disagree, I would argue that primes, are the best way to learn about composition and the camera. With zoom lenses perspective changes, thats why 85mm is portrait length, and hugely different to 24mm held closer to the subject. Learning composition and considering the perspective changes, and the flattening or exaggerating properties of different parts of a zoom range on the fly I think brings more variables into the mix and that means a distraction from the image at hand. With a few primes images will be sharper, more likely than not better contrast, more control over DOF, and better low light ability.

For the used cost of a 28, a 50, and an 85, It's probably worth having both a zoom (for the kids birthday party), and primes (for tripod stuff) really. Just a thought.

 

[Patriot]

Don't waste money on a prime if your on a budget. Get the canon 50mm f1.8 for a great bokeh, if that is what you want. The lens is very sharp and around $100. Learn to take great pictures with the cheap lenses. A prime lens will make a ****ty photography take great ****ty images. Learn the camera, how to use the lenses and learn composition. If you can take the most beautiful pictures but the composition sucks then the photograph sucks.

Prime lenses are really for the guy who's making a living off of his photography. It's not for the weekend photo warrior, or someone trying to learn to get better at the craft. Not for the guy taking photos of his kids birthday parties. The cost comes in when you want a fast lens and you can get those without purchasing a prime lens. Use the prime lens money to get more lenses that cost less.

With the cheap and free software today that is what you need to learn. How to use a photoshop, photoimpact or photopaint program and get some plugins from a serif, topaz, machinery hd effects or others. These aid you with cropping photos, enhancing the colors, sharpness, hue, saturation and so on.

Spend the money you have wisely. Prime lenses for amatuers is not... unless you have money to throw at the craft. Good luck with your photography.

What is this crap!? Primes are great for making you learn composition. You always have to move closer to "zoom" and think how your going to make the picture work. What if your doing street photography and cant get too close to a subject(homeless person) without offening them? You now have to think outside the box. You have to think about everything else around your subect because you cant isolate him/her anymore by zooming in. I like all of my primes and do believe that you can use it in every day photography.

 

[rpm]

Don't waste money on a prime if your on a budget. Get the canon 50mm f1.8 for a great bokeh, if that is what you want. The lens is very sharp and around $100. Learn to take great pictures with the cheap lenses. A prime lens will make a ****ty photography take great ****ty images. Learn the camera, how to use the lenses and learn composition. If you can take the most beautiful pictures but the composition sucks then the photograph sucks.

Prime lenses are really for the guy who's making a living off of his photography. It's not for the weekend photo warrior, or someone trying to learn to get better at the craft. Not for the guy taking photos of his kids birthday parties. The cost comes in when you want a fast lens and you can get those without purchasing a prime lens. Use the prime lens money to get more lenses that cost less.

With the cheap and free software today that is what you need to learn. How to use a photoshop, photoimpact or photopaint program and get some plugins from a serif, topaz, machinery hd effects or others. These aid you with cropping photos, enhancing the colors, sharpness, hue, saturation and so on.

Spend the money you have wisely. Prime lenses for amatuers is not... unless you have money to throw at the craft. Good luck with your photography.

What is this crap!? Primes are great for making you learn composition. You always have to move closer to "zoom" and think how your going to make the picture work. What if your doing street photography and cant get too close to a subject(homeless person) without offening them? You now have to think outside the box. You have to think about everything else around your subect because you cant isolate him/her anymore by zooming in. I like all of my primes and do believe that you can use it in every day photography.

totally agree. i started off with the 18-55... got a 50mm 1.8D...the amount i learnt with the prime dwarfed what the 18-55 could teach me in many regards. from aperture control (total fluid control from 1.8-22 is very diff from working from the 'widest' available at a given range) all the way to composition as previously mentioned you had to think, movie and consider a lot of limitations surrounding the lens being used. it came to a point where i sold the 18-55 to aid in my next prime purchase the 85mm 1.4D (second lens in my bag. two primes and no zooms.). to say its only for those making a living from photography is absurd (to which i dont). in that line of thought id hope to not see a f2.8 lens or wider in your bag and only see at best an f4 constant zoom lens....a prime is valuable for anyone knowing what they want to achieve with it. its not the most versatile purchase but its probably one of the most valuable (for those who know what they want from it)

 

[Tee]

I've not read all of the replies so sorry if this has already been said.

For me, when I use bokeh depends on two things:

1: Do I want the background to be a part of the overall mood of the photo.

2: Is the background busy (distracting) such as random branches, a bright sign behind the subject, etc.

I think you may have bokeh and depth of field confused. Your 2 points listed above is depth of field.

 

[table1349]

Don't waste money on a prime if your on a budget. Get the canon 50mm f1.8 for a great bokeh, if that is what you want. The lens is very sharp and around $100. Learn to take great pictures with the cheap lenses. A prime lens will make a ****ty photography take great ****ty images. Learn the camera, how to use the lenses and learn composition. If you can take the most beautiful pictures but the composition sucks then the photograph sucks. Prime lenses are really for the guy who's making a living off of his photography. It's not for the weekend photo warrior, or someone trying to learn to get better at the craft. Not for the guy taking photos of his kids birthday parties. The cost comes in when you want a fast lens and you can get those without purchasing a prime lens. Use the prime lens money to get more lenses that cost less. With the cheap and free software today that is what you need to learn. How to use a photoshop, photoimpact or photopaint program and get some plugins from a serif, topaz, machinery hd effects or others. These aid you with cropping photos, enhancing the colors, sharpness, hue, saturation and so on. Spend the money you have wisely. Prime lenses for amatuers is not... unless you have money to throw at the craft. Good luck with your photography.

Don't waste money on a prime if your on a budget. Get the canon 50mm f1.8 for a great bokeh, if that is what you want. The lens is very sharp and around $100. Learn to take great pictures with the cheap lenses. A prime lens will make a ****ty photography take great ****ty images. Learn the camera, how to use the lenses and learn composition. If you can take the most beautiful pictures but the composition sucks then the photograph sucks.Prime lenses are really for the guy who's making a living off of his photography. It's not for the weekend photo warrior, or someone trying to learn to get better at the craft. Not for the guy taking photos of his kids birthday parties. The cost comes in when you want a fast lens and you can get those without purchasing a prime lens. Use the prime lens money to get more lenses that cost less.With the cheap and free software today that is what you need to learn. How to use a photoshop, photoimpact or photopaint program and get some plugins from a serif, topaz, machinery hd effects or others. These aid you with cropping photos, enhancing the colors, sharpness, hue, saturation and so on.Spend the money you have wisely. Prime lenses for amatuers is not... unless you have money to throw at the craft. Good luck with your photography.

Saying the Canon 50mm f1.8 has "great Bokeh" is just totally false. You get what you pay for, and prime lenses are not specifically geared towards people making an income on photography. You have some pretty far out ideas.

Don't waste money on a prime if your on a budget. Get the canon 50mm f1.8 for a great bokeh, if that is what you want. The lens is very sharp and around $100. Learn to take great pictures with the cheap lenses. A prime lens will make a ****ty photography take great ****ty images. Learn the camera, how to use the lenses and learn composition. If you can take the most beautiful pictures but the composition sucks then the photograph sucks. Prime lenses are really for the guy who's making a living off of his photography. It's not for the weekend photo warrior, or someone trying to learn to get better at the craft. Not for the guy taking photos of his kids birthday parties. The cost comes in when you want a fast lens and you can get those without purchasing a prime lens. Use the prime lens money to get more lenses that cost less. With the cheap and free software today that is what you need to learn. How to use a photoshop, photoimpact or photopaint program and get some plugins from a serif, topaz, machinery hd effects or others. These aid you with cropping photos, enhancing the colors, sharpness, hue, saturation and so on. Spend the money you have wisely. Prime lenses for amatuers is not... unless you have money to throw at the craft. Good luck with your photography.

I disagree, I would argue that primes, are the best way to learn about composition and the camera. With zoom lenses perspective changes, thats why 85mm is portrait length, and hugely different to 24mm held closer to the subject. Learning composition and considering the perspective changes, and the flattening or exaggerating properties of different parts of a zoom range on the fly I think brings more variables into the mix and that means a distraction from the image at hand. With a few primes images will be sharper, more likely than not better contrast, more control over DOF, and better low light ability. For the used cost of a 28, a 50, and an 85, It's probably worth having both a zoom (for the kids birthday party), and primes (for tripod stuff) really. Just a thought.

Don't waste money on a prime if your on a budget. Get the canon 50mm f1.8 for a great bokeh, if that is what you want. The lens is very sharp and around $100. Learn to take great pictures with the cheap lenses. A prime lens will make a ****ty photography take great ****ty images. Learn the camera, how to use the lenses and learn composition. If you can take the most beautiful pictures but the composition sucks then the photograph sucks. Prime lenses are really for the guy who's making a living off of his photography. It's not for the weekend photo warrior, or someone trying to learn to get better at the craft. Not for the guy taking photos of his kids birthday parties. The cost comes in when you want a fast lens and you can get those without purchasing a prime lens. Use the prime lens money to get more lenses that cost less. With the cheap and free software today that is what you need to learn. How to use a photoshop, photoimpact or photopaint program and get some plugins from a serif, topaz, machinery hd effects or others. These aid you with cropping photos, enhancing the colors, sharpness, hue, saturation and so on. Spend the money you have wisely. Prime lenses for amatuers is not... unless you have money to throw at the craft. Good luck with your photography.

What is this crap!? Primes are great for making you learn composition. You always have to move closer to "zoom" and think how your going to make the picture work. What if your doing street photography and cant get too close to a subject(homeless person) without offening them? You now have to think outside the box. You have to think about everything else around your subect because you cant isolate him/her anymore by zooming in. I like all of my primes and do believe that you can use it in every day photography.

Don't waste money on a prime if your on a budget. Get the canon 50mm f1.8 for a great bokeh, if that is what you want. The lens is very sharp and around $100. Learn to take great pictures with the cheap lenses. A prime lens will make a ****ty photography take great ****ty images. Learn the camera, how to use the lenses and learn composition. If you can take the most beautiful pictures but the composition sucks then the photograph sucks. Prime lenses are really for the guy who's making a living off of his photography. It's not for the weekend photo warrior, or someone trying to learn to get better at the craft. Not for the guy taking photos of his kids birthday parties. The cost comes in when you want a fast lens and you can get those without purchasing a prime lens. Use the prime lens money to get more lenses that cost less. With the cheap and free software today that is what you need to learn. How to use a photoshop, photoimpact or photopaint program and get some plugins from a serif, topaz, machinery hd effects or others. These aid you with cropping photos, enhancing the colors, sharpness, hue, saturation and so on. Spend the money you have wisely. Prime lenses for amatuers is not... unless you have money to throw at the craft. Good luck with your photography.

What is this crap!? Primes are great for making you learn composition. You always have to move closer to "zoom" and think how your going to make the picture work. What if your doing street photography and cant get too close to a subject(homeless person) without offening them? You now have to think outside the box. You have to think about everything else around your subect because you cant isolate him/her anymore by zooming in. I like all of my primes and do believe that you can use it in every day photography.

totally agree. i started off with the 18-55... got a 50mm 1.8D...the amount i learnt with the prime dwarfed what the 18-55 could teach me in many regards. from aperture control (total fluid control from 1.8-22 is very diff from working from the 'widest' available at a given range) all the way to composition as previously mentioned you had to think, movie and consider a lot of limitations surrounding the lens being used. it came to a point where i sold the 18-55 to aid in my next prime purchase the 85mm 1.4D (second lens in my bag. two primes and no zooms.). to say its only for those making a living from photography is absurd (to which i dont). in that line of thought id hope to not see a f2.8 lens or wider in your bag and only see at best an f4 constant zoom lens....a prime is valuable for anyone knowing what they want to achieve with it. its not the most versatile purchase but its probably one of the most valuable (for those who know what they want from it)

Thanks Tyler, Wolfe, Patriot, & Rpm. You have saved me a lot of trouble of responding to such drivel. You guys said it all.

 

[photfor666]

I do not intend to come back to this forum ever again, because it is full of nonsense. Bokeh is not something you choose. It is a result of the background object shapes, the aperture setting, the zoom point (if using a zoom lens), and the lens element design. Aperture blades are not the main cause. Bokeh (or "boke" in the original westernization of the Japanese term) is the appearance we notice in the out-of-focus area of a photo. There is no level, such as "a lot of bokeh" or less bokeh. There is only some impression you get from looking at it. When the out of focus elements seem duplicated, like a series of layers of the background were place one over the other but slightly out of position, we say it looks nervous. When the out of focus area seems well-blended with no obvious duplicated shapes, we say it looks buttery.

All oddities that were considered faults in photography 50 years ago (poor focus, tilted horizon, nervous bokeh) are cheered by some modern photographers as artistic expression. Back in the old days, buttery bokeh was great and nervous bokeh was awful. A lens maker has no trouble achieving nervous bokeh. He must know his stuff and use a great (and usually expensive) design to achieve buttery bokeh.

If you want to know about depth of field, that is unrelated, except that if the depth of field is great, we have little or no out-of-focus area to talk about, and thus no bokeh to consider.

 

[Buckster]

I do not intend to come back to this forum ever again, because it is full of nonsense.

You forgot to say, "SO THERE!!!!"

Hey, it's probably for the best anyway. If you don't have the temperament to help educate here, you'll just be frustrated all the time, and that's no fun for anyone.

Best of luck on your journey to find a forum where everyone already knows everything and agrees with you 100%.

 

[Patriot]

I do not intend to come back to this forum ever again, because it is full of nonsense. Bokeh is not something you choose. It is a result of the background object shapes, the aperture setting, the zoom point (if using a zoom lens), and the lens element design. Aperture blades are not the main cause. Bokeh (or "boke" in the original westernization of the Japanese term) is the appearance we notice in the out-of-focus area of a photo. There is no level, such as "a lot of bokeh" or less bokeh. There is only some impression you get from looking at it. When the out of focus elements seem duplicated, like a series of layers of the background were place one over the other but slightly out of position, we say it looks nervous. When the out of focus area seems well-blended with no obvious duplicated shapes, we say it looks buttery.

All oddities that were considered faults in photography 50 years ago (poor focus, tilted horizon, nervous bokeh) are cheered by some modern photographers as artistic expression. Back in the old days, buttery bokeh was great and nervous bokeh was awful. A lens maker has no trouble achieving nervous bokeh. He must know his stuff and use a great (and usually expensive) design to achieve buttery bokeh.

If you want to know about depth of field, that is unrelated, except that if the depth of field is great, we have little or no out-of-focus area to talk about, and thus no bokeh to consider.

Congrats on your first post!!! Bye bye you haven't been here long.

 

[rexbobcat]

I do not intend to come back to this forum ever again, because it is full of nonsense. Bokeh is not something you choose. It is a result of the background object shapes, the aperture setting, the zoom point (if using a zoom lens), and the lens element design. Aperture blades are not the main cause. Bokeh (or "boke" in the original westernization of the Japanese term) is the appearance we notice in the out-of-focus area of a photo. There is no level, such as "a lot of bokeh" or less bokeh. There is only some impression you get from looking at it. When the out of focus elements seem duplicated, like a series of layers of the background were place one over the other but slightly out of position, we say it looks nervous. When the out of focus area seems well-blended with no obvious duplicated shapes, we say it looks buttery.

All oddities that were considered faults in photography 50 years ago (poor focus, tilted horizon, nervous bokeh) are cheered by some modern photographers as artistic expression. Back in the old days, buttery bokeh was great and nervous bokeh was awful. A lens maker has no trouble achieving nervous bokeh. He must know his stuff and use a great (and usually expensive) design to achieve buttery bokeh.

If you want to know about depth of field, that is unrelated, except that if the depth of field is great, we have little or no out-of-focus area to talk about, and thus no bokeh to consider.

Well aren't you the smart cookie! You get a gold star for giving me my first "no s**t" moment of the day.

Can't...resist...posting...Nicholas Cage meme...

You don't say?