Is Gaussian blur ideal bokeh?

[SCraig]

I've used Gaussian blur to clean up an ugly background before. It worked fine for me. I don't recommend that you try to CREATE bokeh with it, but it works fine to increase it slightly.

 

[Edsport]

In both photos i used photoshop's "lens blur".
Click on the link and scroll to the bottom of page to see a before and after... http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...can-you-make-these-fabulous-better-least.html

 

[Patrice]

In the image above by Edsport the 'blur' seems even on all the image elements apart from the subject. The near and far background objects usually have different amount of 'blur' in a natural image. Notice the hand rail just below his left shirt sleeve, it should be in focus since it's in roughly the same plane.

 

[analog.universe]

Bokeh is certainly subjective... I don't think you can say gaussian always looks best. On certain backgrounds, a lens with good bokeh will appear gaussian, on others, it will create the sharp but diffuse blobs you were talking about. I think what causes me to say bokeh is good is how well it gives a 3D impression to the scene. Obliterating the background is nice sometimes, but I like bokeh when it gives you an idea of the depth relationships in the scene. So when it's good, the lens not only renders a nice blur, but also a nice transition between sharp and blur that enhances the feeling of depth. I think "harsh" bokeh falls short because often the background is too busy to look sufficiently far away, but of course that depends on the shot. Good bokeh can have sharp elements and diffuse elements, as long they serve to support the depth of the scene, not obscure it.