bokeh

[George Papantoniou]

Originally Posted by mono

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?

How have you done so nice pictures without knowing what Bokeh is ? :-)

(PS shoudn't you spell your name "Volker" ?)

[mono]

Originally Posted by George Papantoniou

How have you done so nice pictures without knowing what Bokeh is ? :-)

(PS shoudn't you spell your name "Volker" ?)

Thank you George!
But I really have no idea what bokeh is, have never heard of it before I joined APUG.
This name is correct with F! Most people ask this question ;-)

[O Fernandez]

Originally Posted by George Papantoniou

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) ?

You can purchase back issue of Photo Techniques on bokeh (May/June 1997/Vol. 18, No. 3: What is 'Bokeh') here: http://www.phototechmag.com/back_issues2.htm scroll down to the right issue. The cost for shipping outside of the USA at $10 (on top of the $5.00 cost of the back issue) is a bit much.

Harold Merklinger’s article, “A Technical View of Bokeh,” can be found for free here: http://www.darkroom.com/MiscDocs/bokeh.pdf . I didn’t find this article so useful as it tends to get too technical and hard to follow. The other two articles from the above issue of Photo Techniques are more interesting to me.

[Dan Fromm]

Originally Posted by George Papantoniou

How have you done so nice pictures without knowing what Bokeh is ? :-)

(snip)

George, have you lost your tiny hellenic mind? Discussions of bokeh are a form of oneupmanship. The sad part of it is that people who carry on lenses' bokeh haven't got to first principles yet.

Yeah, I know, the hokey bokey, that's what its all about. Might even be true, but I doubt it.

Cheers,

Dan

[Oren Grad]

Originally Posted by O Fernandez

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'm happy to try to help if you have specific questions.

[George Papantoniou]

Originally Posted by O Fernandez

You can purchase back issue of Photo Techniques on bokeh (May/June 1997/Vol. 18, No. 3: What is 'Bokeh') here: http://www.phototechmag.com/back_issues2.htm scroll down to the right issue. The cost for shipping outside of the USA at $10 (on top of the $5.00 cost of the back issue) is a bit much.

Harold Merklinger’s article, “A Technical View of Bokeh,” can be found for free here: http://www.darkroom.com/MiscDocs/bokeh.pdf . I didn’t find this article so useful as it tends to get too technical and hard to follow. The other two articles from the above issue of Photo Techniques are more interesting to me.

Thank you, senor Fernandez... I know about the back issue ordering, it's not really (financially) interesting...

The online article is great, I can imagine how good must be the other ones (since they are better)...

[George Papantoniou]

Originally Posted by mono

This name is correct with F! Most people ask this question ;-)

OK Folker, I'll jump in my Folksvagen and come to visit you in Vrankvurt am Main one of these days...

[mono]

Originally Posted by George Papantoniou

OK Folker, I'll jump in my Folksvagen and come to visit you in Vrankvurt am Main one of these days...

;-)))

[Soeren]

Whatever you might think of Ken Rockwell his article on bokeh may be easier to read than others.
Sorry if the link has been posted before.

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

I do understand why Folker take good pics without knowing about bokeh. There is a lot of debth of field in them. Great pics BTW (by the way)

Cheers, Søren

[mono]

Originally Posted by Soeren

Whatever you might think of Ken Rockwell his article on bokeh may be easier to read than others.
Sorry if the link has been posted before.

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

I do understand why Folker take good pics without knowing about bokeh. There is a lot of debth of field in them. Great pics BTW (by the way)

Cheers, Søren

Thank you Soeren!

But I think I am certainly not the subject of this thread ;-)