Bokeh, or...?

[enzodm]

So? (and do not cheat, please)

 

[unpopular]

uhm. what am i supposed to be doing here?

 

[fjrabon]

I think we're supposed to guess if it's natural camera bokeh or photoshop gaussian blur.

 

[unpopular]

well. it's not simple gaussian.

I'm guessing it's photoshop, otherwise what would the point be. It's not a terribly good example, as the background is blurred by the pool of water, making fake blur easier to be convincing. I am also not sure if I am seeing any depth of field, or if there is it's not quite scene accurate.

If it is PS, then it's doing a good job at not-so-perfect bokeh, as illustrated in the plants in the middle ground.

 

[fjrabon]

well. it's not simple gaussian.

I'm guessing it's photoshop, otherwise what would the point be. It's not a terribly good example, as the background is blurred by the pool of water, making fake blur easier to be convincing. I am also not sure if I am seeing any depth of field, or if there is it's not quite scene accurate.

If it is PS, then it's doing a good job at not-so-perfect bokeh, as illustrated in the plants in the middle ground.

Yeah, given that the microphone stand is nearly perfectly in focus all the way to the back of her dress, and then the plant that doesn't seem all that far off is totally out of focus I'm going with photoshop.

 

[unpopular]

Ironically it's the flaws that make fake bokeh challenging. Nice bokeh is relatively easy compared to tilt-a-whirl bokeh and other more complex nuances:



Fortunately for adobe, this nauseating quality isn't desired. (Minolta 50/1.7)

 

[enzodm]

Well, I posted in the fun forum not to take it too seriously.
Simply, after having taken the picture, I saw this smooth background coming from blurred reflections in the lake and I decided to see how it would be considered - fake or not, bokeh or not. Top right reflections are about 50m behind the subject. So, no pp here, just Sigma 50-150/2.8 at 150mm, wide open

Unpopular: I agree on hard to reproduce bokeh features.

 

[o hey tyler]

I really dig the color pallet of the photo. Nice capture Enzo.

 

[unpopular]

I agree. Awesome DOF control and separation something I'm not so great at. I was thinking at first that it was real due to the "doubling" effect of the milk weed, but I just figured that Photoshop's fake DOF was better than I thought it was.

 

[enzodm]

This was the overall scene: far background, so not difficult to achieve good separation (at least at 150/2.8), and extra blur due to water.