What do you think of the bokah on this shot?

[LateModelSedan]

[FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]

[/FONT]​

[FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]Fig. 1. Poor Bokeh. This is a greatly magnified blur circle showing very poor bokeh. A blur circle is how an out-of-focus point of light is rendered. Note how the edge is sharply defined and even emphasized for a point that is supposed to be out-of-focus, and that the center is dim.[/FONT]

[FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]

[/FONT]​

[FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]Fig 2. Neutral Bokeh. This is a a technically perfect and evenly illuminated blur circle. This isn't good either for bokeh, because the edge is still well defined. Out-of-focus objects, either points of light or lines, can effectively create reasonably sharp lines in the image due to the edges of the sharp blur circle. This is the blur circle from most modern lenses designed to be "perfect.[/FONT]

[FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]

[/FONT]​

[FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]Fig. 3. Good Bokeh. Here is what we want. This is great for bokeh since the edge is completely undefined. This also is the result of the same spherical aberration, but in the opposite direction, of the poor example seen in Fig. 1. This is where art and engineering start to diverge, since the better looking image is the result of an imperfection. Perfect bokeh demands a Gaussian blur circle distribution, and lenses are designed for the neutral example shown in 2.) above


Source: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/bokeh.htm

your image would be more like a completely black square behind the subject. [/FONT]

 

[JerryPH]

BokEh is the blurring of the background image. Your image, as stated, has no background, it is a solid colour. Therefore, there is no bokeh.

These would be more appropriate as examples: