Quote Originally Posted by Akki14 View Post

somewhat offtopic question, is bokeh really just depth of field? Or do I just know dumb digiphotogs who use it as a synonym for depth of field? I could have sworn it was more specific to the lens and aperture than just "the fuzzy out of focus bit of the picture".
This is one discussion I remember, (there are sure to be more!)
http://www.apug.org/forums/forum52/27274-bokeh-6.html

Quote Originally Posted by Dave Miller
Strange really, for years most of us have been chasing detail via the purchase of ever more exotic glass, and hardware, bigger film and hang the expense, but now the digi-camp are trying to catch up it seems to be wrong. I wonder why?
Have we though? I haven't. Probably those who were always into sharpness and detail (and all that) over everything else have simply transferred to digital as it offers them what they were always looking for...

HDR makes me think 'graphic art' more than anything else, landscapes seem more often than not like something out of 'Shrek' - though I have seen a very limited amount of excellent images that are doing more emotionally and spiritually than this. I guess there are too many people 'having a go' without really getting to grips with it as artists (is that a kind way of saying what I really think, which is that there is just too much digidross around on internet forums...)