Secret to Bokeh?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldClicker

I believe that the Japanese term 'bokeh' refers more to the quality of the OOF, not just OOF. It means seeing the OOF background as an important artistic part of the photograph. - TF

---

This pretty much sums up my understanding of the word as well. You can have good bokeh, which imo is creamy and smooth looking, and you can have bad bokeh. A good example of bad bokeh for instance might be that of a mirror lens where the background looks like a bunch of circles, or doughnuts. I've also seen bokeh that looks all blotchy, and or spikey, which might actually distract from the image.
Every one has their own version of what they like, or don't like. :p
-Bruce

http://www.photographyreview.com/exposureguidecrx.aspx

Some key things to remember:

• Aperture controls the DOF
• The closer you focus, the shallower the DOF (more blur)
• The further you focus, the deeper the DOF (less blur)
• The longer the focal length, the shallower the DOF (a wide angle has less blur than a tele)

Hope that helps.

For some reason, I seem to get a shallow-er DOF using prime lenses than zoom. Is this the case, or is it perceived on my behalf?

http://gallery.photographyreview.com...ium/img136.jpg

Here is a photo with some crazy bokeh. Enjoy! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danic

For some reason, I seem to get a shallow-er DOF using prime lenses than zoom. Is this the case, or is it perceived on my behalf?

---

I suspect that you are using primes, since they are generally faster/wider, at a wider aperture than you would/could with a zoom.

I wouldn't think prime or zoom would have anything to do with it if they have the same aperture,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frog

I wouldn't think prime or zoom would have anything to do with it if they have the same aperture,

---

I wouldn't have thought so either Frog, but this photo was shot at f16, yet it's still fairly shallow. It was with a 50mm prime, so hence my question about DOF, prime and zoom lenses.

http://gallery.photographyreview.com...ium/img052.png

Danic,

If that was taken with a 50mm at f16 then I think the lens might be broken. There is no way the DOF should be that shallow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebastian

Danic,

If that was taken with a 50mm at f16 then I think the lens might be broken. There is no way the DOF should be that shallow.

---

Right - looks like you focused about 10' away, and at f16 with a 50mm lens this entire shot should be within the DOF (in focus).

Using a prime 50mm at a given focus distance and aperture will give you the same DOF as a zoom lens at 50mm with the same focus distance and aperture.

Here's a tip about shooting a moving subject:
The apature and shutter speed are like a teeter tater. When one goes up, the other goes down, depending upon available light. To capture movement, try setting your camera to shutter preferred and keep bumping up the shutter speed until the apature gets into the bokeh range (low number, wide opening) that you want.

Are you guys sure danic's DOF is off in the pic? I'm guessing the fence is about 3 feet high making the center of focus maybe 7 or 8 feet away??? At 8 feet and f/16, that only gives a little over 5 feet of DOF.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danic

I wouldn't have thought so either Frog, but this photo was shot at f16, yet it's still fairly shallow. It was with a 50mm prime, so hence my question about DOF, prime and zoom lenses.

---

This may help:

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tut...h-of-field.htm

And here:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/dof2.shtml

And I quote:

In fact, if the subject image size remains the same, then at any given aperture all lenses will give the same depth of field.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xia_Ke

Are you guys sure danic's DOF is off in the pic? I'm guessing the fence is about 3 feet high making the center of focus maybe 7 or 8 feet away??? At 8 feet and f/16, that only gives a little over 5 feet of DOF.

---

This is what I was thinking. I've been wrong before though. :)
-Bruce

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xia_Ke

Are you guys sure danic's DOF is off in the pic? I'm guessing the fence is about 3 feet high making the center of focus maybe 7 or 8 feet away??? At 8 feet and f/16, that only gives a little over 5 feet of DOF.

---

Or could be about 9.29 ft according to here:

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

Assuming danic was shooting with film camera.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AgingEyes

Or could be about 9.29 ft according to here:

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

Assuming danic was shooting with film camera.

---

True, I assumed DSLR. Good site too, that's where I got the 5 foot figure.

Here are a couple from Christmas yesterday at my brothers...

I wish I had experimented around a bit more but I took all the pictures with the 50mm at 1.8 setting. I did mess around with shutter speed alot, depending on the light quality

My niece is in a Cinderella phase, she never takes the dress off :)

My nephew just eats constantly

Sorry, I've been away for a couple of days. It was a 35mm film camera. I thought there would have been more DOF anyway.

It's always interesting to generate some discussion on things like this anyway. I've learned a few things about DOF and hyperfocal distance's, so thanks a heap for the websites above!

Cheers,
Dan

I don't know if this will confuse the matter more than it will help, but here is an example I shot a while ago with 3 different lenses - a 50mm f/1.8, a 50mm f/1.4, and a 24-70mm f/2.8L (at 50mm) - all stopped down to f/4 and shot from the same distance. Single strobe positioned for extreme side-lighting.

Focus was set at the very tip of the ball point. The first is the uncropped shot followed by the same OOF areas by the 3 different lenses.

The real secret to bokeh ... is knowing how to pronounce the word.

"A good example of bad bokeh for instance might be that of a mirror lens where the background looks like a bunch of circles, or doughnuts." ... Ballen Photo.

BP, good bokeh is knowing how to caption a shot like that.

'Franky Goes to the Capital Bakery to Buy Fresh Coissants and Donuts.'


http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/d...Partissery.png


Shot with Nikor 500mm f8.0 catadioptic objectives.


Warren.

Josh D, you mentioned what gear you have, so put this technique aside for another day if you don't have this gear.

This technique is excellent for shooting a limited depth of field of just a few inches which result in a definitive bokeh, when shooting head and shoulder portraits.

An extension tube placed between the camera and a telephoto lens (on a 150mm lens for example) when shooting portraits will shorten the depth of field to just a few inches and still allow usable shutter speed aperture combinations, in bright daylight. Combinations like1/125 sec at f11.0 in daylight, will still give a definitive bokeh.

Warren.

It is easy to get beautiful bokeh out from any of your lens when using macro extension with the lens. I think it multiplies it...