That liquor totally knocked me out in the restroom in a bar once and I couldn't make it home that night. I was pretty artistic with myself on the floor.
You may be artistic but the problem is you hardly can get a hold of camera. You get bokeh in your brain but not on the film.
The May/June 1997 issue of Photo Techniques published three very informative articles on the matter of bokeh: “What is Bokeh?” by John Kennerdell; “Notes on the Terminology of Bokeh“ by Oren Grad; and “A Technical view of Bokeh” by Harold Merkeinger. The last article can be found posted on the internet, while the other two more interesting article are not, and are probably covered by copyright laws, so the only way to obtain them is to buy the back issue of Photo Techniques. I wish Oren Grad had decided to speak up more on the topic of bokeh, since his article is the most pertinent to this discussion. I list some of the salient points and terminology from Oren Grad‘s article:
* bokeh refers to the rendition of the out of focus areas of a photograph, and may be classified as good or bad bokeh.
* good bokeh softens the objects in front of the plane of focus (mae-boke).
*Out-of-focus background objects (ushiro-bokeh) lose detail but maintain their basis shapes and tones.
* One common fault noted in Japanese lens tests is ni-sen (two-line) bokeh: a tendency for out of focus objects to separate into two overlapping images.
* Some o-o-f highlights may be described as having enkan (ring) bokeh.
* O-o-f highlights having recognizable shapes may be described by the terms enkei (circular) bokeh, han-enjoh (semi-circular) bokeh, marumi ga aru (roundish), hosongai (long and narrow) or kometto-job
* When the lens is stopped down the blade structure of the iris may become apparent in the form of surudoi kado (sharp corners) in the ten bokeh (point bokeh)
Oren Grad’s article goes on to describe some vague and subjective bokeh terms;
* The overall look of the image may be described as sofuto (soft) or katai (hard)
* As the bokeh becomes less clean it may be described as hanzatsu (complex) or as kuzureru (breaking up or loosing shape).
Also noted in the article are some, overall judgmental terms summing up a lens’ bokeh: kirei (pretty, beautiful, clean); sunao (gentle, well behaved); yoi (good); konomashii (nice, likeable); odayaka (gentle); shzen (natural) or even “kani no yoi bokeh " - bokeh that gives a good feeling; or when the reviewer is being critical, as the absence of such qualities.
In all the first two articles noted are the most informative discussion of bokeh, and certainly more complete an explanation than I have seen anywhere on the internet.
Mr Fernandez, this is really impressive !!!! I will look for the issue you mention in my Photo Techniques collection, but in case I don't find it, could you point out the link where the third article can be found (the one that is posted on the internet) ?
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG
have the option to remove this ad.)
O.Fernandez, thanks for that, it's the most comprehensive and clearest summary I've seen.
In answer to mono's question, isn't bokeh *just* 'out of focus' areas. We perceive this differently, in terms of what is aesthetically acceptable or not (so it's subjective). But an attempt has been made to define certain kinds or patterns of renditions in the out of focus areas.
I think part of the problem of understanding/defining bokeh is a cultural one, and in our western way we want something definite and *right* or *wrong* when it's not as cut and dried as that, and the Japanese language is infinitely more subtle than ours. In the end, it doesn't matter, go with what pleases you. If you think of 'bokeh' as meaning 'blur' (which I think is how it translates) then you realise it isn't specific, and it isn't in itself value-laden, though we make judgements about particular renditions of it.
I think part of the problem of understanding/defining bokeh is a cultural one, and in our western way we want something definite and *right* or *wrong* when it's not as cut and dried as that, and the Japanese language is infinitely more subtle than ours. In the end, it doesn't matter, go with what pleases you. If you think of 'bokeh' as meaning 'blur' (which I think is how it translates) then you realise it isn't specific, and it isn't in itself value-laden, though we make judgements about particular renditions of it.
Speaking of subtlety, here's something related to what we've been discussing here:
what some Japanese people pay attention to is the part of substance that hardly matters to and/or simply not wanted by others. The texture of raw meat (in this picture it's beef) is just as popular as the bokeh taste on lens quality. Japanese people tend to prefer it with some (but to me too much) fat rather than the lean part only, and they think it's their Japanese taste.
I think I've posted a similar comment somewhere before. But that's the easiest way to explain what subtlety means to over here.
Sorry, my English is not good as yours, but I still do not understand what bokeh really is or means!
Can you help me, please?
You should do a Google search for Bokeh and you'll be fairly enlightened. A simplified way to put it (sorry if I oversimplify it) would be:
Bokeh is the way the out-of-focus areas of the image look when using a specific lens. Some lenses have nice Bokeh (the out-of-focus areas look nice) and some other not. Pinhole cameras have OK Bokeh (but they don't have a lens :-)
A German (like you) might ask: Why the h**l would someone care how an out-of-focus area would look when the objective is not to have out-of-focus areas on the film ? Well, the answer to that can be given by someone else...
Linear Mode
