Choose from three options.

Pictorially which would you prefer, if given only these choices:


  • Total voters
    7
I kind of get what you're asking, but they're three separate ideas.

Congrats for getting what was asked, it was intentionally a simplistic poll. Yes these are three different styles..so what?
 
Congrats for getting what was asked, it was intentionally a simplistic poll. Yes these are three different styles..so what?

Ahh, but it's an odd question because I don't have a preference in what I would like to see. I would like to be presented with something that makes me think, which automatically negates my preference in choosing it in advance. ;)

Which would I like to explore?

Notan. :)
 
Bokeh is something that can be used to hint at or to show depth, and depth planes. Yes, it is a "function of the lens", but that's a rather meaningless statement when taken out of the context of using a lens to MAKE a photo..

I agree.. ' a function of the lens' ..meaningless.

The most useful interpretation of bokeh with regard to photography i've been introduced to is not only the blur characteristics but also the drawing style. Bokeh can be an important part of telling the story, not just obliterating the background to emphasise a singular element in an obvioous way. Compare two graphic artists ('cartoonists') and how they might differ in rendering the background details of a picture to a greater or lesser dgree; that's the boke characteristics of a lens (in any given situation). This can f/1.4 or f8 - any aperture. For example, it's like using a polariser; it doesn't have to used at maxmum effect.
 
Last edited:
In terms of polling a photo forum, I use notan (like bokeh) within a narrow meaning where a picture is intentionally lacking in perspective depth. Some people occassionally seemed alarmed by a body of work that doesn't rely on capturing perspective in a conventional way. Sleist's recent post of an image in the general gallery imo is a good use of a 'notan' approach in a modern, everyday, western setting.
 
The first two are essentially the same (contrast between light and dark) while Bokah is an out of focus melding of colors in shapes.
I vote for the beauty of Bokah.

I thought it was spelled Bokeh not Bokah .
 
My take:

Notan: I think it is very limited as far as photography. I could arrange dark and light items for a shoot, but I'm not sure how far I could go with that.

Bokeh: I suspect most will take this but it's a function of the lens. I also like the soft backgrounds and, but a lens either has pleasant bokeh or it doesn't.

Chiaroscuro: I see this as what can be controlled and adjusted to fit the photographer's needs; the most flexible, and only technique IMO.

I'll still take the bacon.
Best answer is Bacon Background Bokeh

You can make the Background in focus or out of focus,
it won't matter much because it's Bacon Bokeh and everyone will like it.
 
I guess I will have to study up.
I have never heard of Notan or Chiaroscuro.

I wonder how TSE lenses fit into all these different kinds of technics ?
 
What do you wish to achieve?

Whether your preference is for oranges, apples or walruses given the choice.
My point being that while two of them are similar concepts, the third (Bokeh) is completely and utterly unrelated. Thefore, how do you make a choice between it and the two "light/dark" options?
 
What do you wish to achieve?

Whether your preference is for oranges, apples or walruses given the choice.
My point being that while two of them are similar concepts, the third (Bokeh) is completely and utterly unrelated. Thefore, how do you make a choice between it and the two "light/dark" options?

I don't see the similarities or differences in absolute terms like that.

To me the question/poll is asking which preference(s) photographers may have to image making. Maybe a preference, maybe no preference, situational preferences worth discussing, opinions given and so on.

To be too rigid with using a term like 'notan' to describe an intent to create an image (that it must remain rooted in an esoteric? philosophy - it's a term appropriated, like boke, that can help communicate an idea in a discussion between image makers).
Neither chiaro nor oscuro mean 'light' or 'dark', they mean clear and obscure.
Using notan in the sense of photography means depicting without perspective depth.
Chiaroscuro relies on a modelling 3d look; bokeh becomes more extreme with longer focal lengths - flattening the perspective - usually in conjunction with distance and seperation.
 
Last edited:
I wonder how TSE lenses fit into all these different kinds of technics ?

That's a good question. I think it could add to both a chiaroscuro or a notan style image yet necessarily reduce bokeh if the movements are to provide maximum depth of field.
 
My point being that while two of them are similar concepts, the third (Bokeh) is completely and utterly unrelated. Thefore, how do you make a choice between it and the two "light/dark" options?

IMO those two could be compared, in that a relationship between them is one of opposites. Bokeh is/has become for some people the point of some pictures themselves. So the poll is: do you have a preference to make/view chiaroscuro or notan or bokeh photos.
 
Very happy that the Spelling Police are on the job. Don't know what we'd do without their help.

Its a thankless job too. personally I get allot of people who say thank you
But at times I just don't feel the love.... You know what I mean.

I can only say I got nailed on the same stinking word except I miss spelled it Boken, .
Damm I hate being corrected, but I had to suck it up, and said thanks even though I really didn't mean it .....

But I bet you are just warm all inside knowing you know how to spell the word Bokeh correctly.

Have a nice day.....
 
I wonder how TSE lenses fit into all these different kinds of technics ?

That's a good question. I think it could add to both a chiaroscuro or a notan style image yet necessarily reduce bokeh if the movements are to provide maximum depth of field.

So educate , can you explain these different technics or supply some links to these different technics explaining what they are and how they can be a plus to certain kinds or styles of photography ?
 

Most reactions

Back
Top