frogfish Posted February 2, 2019 Share #1 Posted February 2, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi everybody When I started shooting Leica professionally about two years ago (M240) I relatively quickly drifted to a more ar less closed down aperture (like f8) to be fast enough for all the moments (artistic wedding photographer). It reshaped my approach to reportage and I am a big fan of layering now. Then came film! I don't know what took me so long but after many years of shooting digital I tried film again - and fell so deeply in love that there will never be a way back. And... quite unexpected fell in love with gorgeous bokeh und shallow depth of field again. I don't know exactly what it is, maybe it is because of the character of film (a slightly missed focus is not that bad). is it the absolutely gorgeous bokeh of the 50/1.1 7artisans or simply the fact that I have become better in focussing. Maybe a bit of everything. You guys (and gals) do shallow depth of field in reportage? heiko Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! 11 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/293922-the-thing-with-the-bokeh/?do=findComment&comment=3676706'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 2, 2019 Posted February 2, 2019 Hi frogfish, Take a look here the thing with the bokeh.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
frogfish Posted February 2, 2019 Author Share #2 Posted February 2, 2019 ... Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! 14 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/293922-the-thing-with-the-bokeh/?do=findComment&comment=3676707'>More sharing options...
pico Posted February 2, 2019 Share #3 Posted February 2, 2019 (edited) It is a bit of everything encouraged by a brave confidence in your own vision to find, then exploit the best bits. Edited February 2, 2019 by pico Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ko.Fe. Posted February 3, 2019 Share #4 Posted February 3, 2019 I'm not a fan for portraits where just something is in focus. This is why I have Jane Bown book of portraits. I have no books with photos taken digitally. I consider only film as the media to get some artistic results. Bokeh... it is easy on digital as well. I don't need 1.1 bulk for it on my digital M. Light and compact 50 1.5 Jupiter-3 will do. Can't remember which lens I used on M-E for this one. But nothing super fast and bulky. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/293922-the-thing-with-the-bokeh/?do=findComment&comment=3676875'>More sharing options...
farnz Posted February 3, 2019 Share #5 Posted February 3, 2019 (edited) Yes but I use the 50/1 Noctilux for its wonderfully smooth bokeh*, thin depth of field, and supreme flare-resistance. *Not at all 'swirly'. Both digital pictures. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Edited February 3, 2019 by farnz 7 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/293922-the-thing-with-the-bokeh/?do=findComment&comment=3676877'>More sharing options...
dkmoore Posted February 3, 2019 Share #6 Posted February 3, 2019 52 minutes ago, Ko.Fe. said: I'm not a fan for portraits where just something is in focus. This is why I have Jane Bown book of portraits. I have no books with photos taken digitally. I consider only film as the media to get some artistic results. Bokeh... it is easy on digital as well. I don't need 1.1 bulk for it on my digital M. Light and compact 50 1.5 Jupiter-3 will do. Can't remember which lens I used on M-E for this one. But nothing super fast and bulky. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! This isn't a great example contradicting the original posters comment so I am not sure what you are trying to say? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ko.Fe. Posted February 3, 2019 Share #7 Posted February 3, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) 19 minutes ago, dkmoore said: This isn't a great example contradicting the original posters comment so I am not sure what you are trying to say? It is great example of bokeh. The rest is not important. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frogfish Posted February 3, 2019 Author Share #8 Posted February 3, 2019 vor 6 Stunden schrieb Ko.Fe.: I'm not a fan for portraits where just something is in focus. This is why I have Jane Bown book of portraits. I have no books with photos taken digitally. I consider only film as the media to get some artistic results. Bokeh... it is easy on digital as well. I don't need 1.1 bulk for it on my digital M. Light and compact 50 1.5 Jupiter-3 will do. Can't remember which lens I used on M-E for this one. But nothing super fast and bulky. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! of course bokeh is easy on some branches. The questions was if you use shallow depth of field in reportage/movin/unposed kind of situations. Oh, and of course also a 50/1.5 creates areas that are not in focus. Sorry, don't get your point. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shlomo Posted February 3, 2019 Share #9 Posted February 3, 2019 12 hours ago, frogfish said: ... Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! This one I appreciate very much, good mood, classy contrast, nice work! Greetings, Shlomo. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ko.Fe. Posted February 3, 2019 Share #10 Posted February 3, 2019 8 hours ago, frogfish said: The questions was if you use shallow depth of field in reportage/movin/unposed kind of situations. HCB, GW, Diane Arbus photography. Lost of reportage taken with film by them. I can't recall "layering". Maybe it is where and in many, but it is irrelevant to the reportage. Magnum contacts book. They have few pages with similar to yours soft, not in focus images. Looks like cool art to me. It was not reportage, but some barely dressed ladies. What not to get here? Once you are into the life and on film, all of these bokeh and layering talks becomes irrelevant. The only reason large aperture lenses were made was for compensation of low sensitivity films. Leica (Leitz) lenses included. Person who was into the life capture would switch to large aperture lens to be able to take the picture. Not the bokeh. :). This is recent example of f1.5 lens use on film M to capture the life, not the bokeh, nor layering. Wide open, 1/30, because it is dark and it is 400 film. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! I switch to f1.5 lens during dark time of the year. This is this simple. Not for bokeh, but for light gathering power. I would get 50 1.1 for same reason, but I see no benefit of bulky lenses, blocking VF for travel, walk around, reportage. Another example, layering comes naturally if you are using film. Here is no ISO12800, so large aperture is needed with film. Also (nothing to get where, either) bokeh might become naturally if you are taking it with, say, f5.6 aperture but here is distance between subject and background. Your shots could be taken with smaller apertures to have person in focus and due to the distance from the background, it will still gives bokeh, layering. Also fast lenses like 50 1.5, 50 1.1 gives more smooth bokeh, OOF even at f5.6, f8. I was astonished by one of these Noctlux (or whatever) super smooth rendering of OOF areas at f5.6-f8. Not Tessar formula for sure. Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! I switch to f1.5 lens during dark time of the year. This is this simple. Not for bokeh, but for light gathering power. I would get 50 1.1 for same reason, but I see no benefit of bulky lenses, blocking VF for travel, walk around, reportage. Another example, layering comes naturally if you are using film. Here is no ISO12800, so large aperture is needed with film. Also (nothing to get where, either) bokeh might become naturally if you are taking it with, say, f5.6 aperture but here is distance between subject and background. Your shots could be taken with smaller apertures to have person in focus and due to the distance from the background, it will still gives bokeh, layering. Also fast lenses like 50 1.5, 50 1.1 gives more smooth bokeh, OOF even at f5.6, f8. I was astonished by one of these Noctlux (or whatever) super smooth rendering of OOF areas at f5.6-f8. Not Tessar formula for sure. ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/293922-the-thing-with-the-bokeh/?do=findComment&comment=3677319'>More sharing options...
JDFlood Posted February 3, 2019 Share #11 Posted February 3, 2019 14 hours ago, dkmoore said: This isn't a great example contradicting the original posters comment so I am not sure what you are trying to say? Nice photo though. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 3, 2019 Share #12 Posted February 3, 2019 I use bokeh as a fig leaf sort of, just to hide disturbing backgrounds or foregrounds. Nothing artistic in that to be honest but i expect bokeh to be as smooth as it can be. I don't use faster lenses than f/1.4 since Noctiluxes and the like are too bulky and expensive for my tastes but the 7artisans 50/1.1 feels tempting indeed. Film vs digital? Not interested at all, i don't use film anymore, but i may add a bit of grain with Silver Efex from time to time. FWIW. Sonnar-C 50/1.5 on M240 here.https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-jzKP7ST/0/a66b3b17/X2/i-jzKP7ST-X2.jpg 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frogfish Posted February 3, 2019 Author Share #13 Posted February 3, 2019 (edited) vor 2 Stunden schrieb Ko.Fe.: HCB, GW, Diane Arbus photography. Lost of reportage taken with film by them. I can't recall "layering". Maybe it is where and in many, but it is irrelevant to the reportage. Magnum contacts book. They have few pages with similar to yours soft, not in focus images. Looks like cool art to me. It was not reportage, but some barely dressed ladies. What not to get here? Once you are into the life and on film, all of these bokeh and layering talks becomes irrelevant. The only reason large aperture lenses were made was for compensation of low sensitivity films. Leica (Leitz) lenses included. Person who was into the life capture would switch to large aperture lens to be able to take the picture. Not the bokeh. :). This is recent example of f1.5 lens use on film M to capture the life, not the bokeh, nor layering. Wide open, 1/30, because it is dark and it is 400 film. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! I switch to f1.5 lens during dark time of the year. This is this simple. Not for bokeh, but for light gathering power. I would get 50 1.1 for same reason, but I see no benefit of bulky lenses, blocking VF for travel, walk around, reportage. Another example, layering comes naturally if you are using film. Here is no ISO12800, so large aperture is needed with film. Also (nothing to get where, either) bokeh might become naturally if you are taking it with, say, f5.6 aperture but here is distance between subject and background. Your shots could be taken with smaller apertures to have person in focus and due to the distance from the background, it will still gives bokeh, layering. Also fast lenses like 50 1.5, 50 1.1 gives more smooth bokeh, OOF even at f5.6, f8. I was astonished by one of these Noctlux (or whatever) super smooth rendering of OOF areas at f5.6-f8. Not Tessar formula for sure. sorry mate, we live on totally different planets. Aperture, and therefore DOF is a tool of artistic expression. You might be forced to shoot wide open in bad light, but that is necessary because of technical limitation. At all other times aperture is used as a tool of composition, as focal lengths is. Layering actually means that you arrange the persons in the image from foreground to background in a aesthetically pleasing manner. It is mandatory when shooting with closed down aperture and more then one item in the frame. Otherwise you do not create a photo, you just point in a direction where something happens and snap away. Nothing wrong with that if you just enjoy using your tool... this might be an example for layering, to give each head enough space to "breathe" . heiko Edited February 3, 2019 by frogfish 7 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ko.Fe. Posted February 3, 2019 Share #14 Posted February 3, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, frogfish said: sorry mate, we live on totally different planets. Aperture, and therefore DOF is a tool of artistic expression. You might be forced to shoot wide open in bad light, but that is necessary because of technical limitation. At all other times aperture is used as a tool of composition, as focal lengths is. Layering actually means that you arrange the persons in the image from foreground to background in a aesthetically pleasing manner. It is mandatory when shooting with closed down aperture and more then one item in the frame. Otherwise you do not create a photo, you just point in a direction where something happens and snap away. Nothing wrong with that if you just enjoy using your tool... this might be an example for layering, to give each head enough space to "breathe" . heiko Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! I'm sorry. What you are actually asking about? Is layering, bokeh in use for reportage (moving) objects? What "arrange" has to do with it? What staged photos has to do with reportage and moving objects? If you call taking pictures of not moving objects and spending time for aesthetic layering as the reportage, we are not on the same planet for sure. Whatever you do with your wedding pictures it looks good. It just has little to do with the reportage. Because reportage is not something staged. Like "you stay here, you move here, wait I'm checking layering". It is not the reportage. This is the reportage with moving objects. Quote You guys (and gals) do shallow depth of field in reportage? Good luck with yours layering, arranging and yours artistic mending with aperture. :). Edited February 3, 2019 by Ko.Fe. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frogfish Posted February 3, 2019 Author Share #15 Posted February 3, 2019 (edited) vor 11 Minuten schrieb Ko.Fe.: I'm sorry. What you are actually asking about? Is layering, bokeh in use for reportage (moving) objects? What "arrange" has to do with it? What staged photos has to do with reportage and moving objects? If you call taking pictures of not moving objects and spending time for aesthetic layering as the reportage, we are not on the same planet for sure. Whatever you do with your wedding pictures it looks good. It just has little to do with the reportage. Because reportage is not something staged. Like "you stay here, you move here, wait I'm checking layering". It is not the reportage. This is the reportage with moving objects. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Good luck with layering and arranging. I do NOT stage! I approach weddings purely in reportage style. (Except for the group shot and some formals). The rest is all candid and without the slightest interference. Sorry, but in this I take huge pride. I never ask people to move, to look or to do anything. However I feel flattered that you think my images are that good in composition that you assume they are staged (0: heiko Edited February 3, 2019 by frogfish 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frogfish Posted February 3, 2019 Author Share #16 Posted February 3, 2019 to get the moment does not mean you should not look for composition. heiko Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! 2 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/293922-the-thing-with-the-bokeh/?do=findComment&comment=3677594'>More sharing options...
Ko.Fe. Posted February 3, 2019 Share #17 Posted February 3, 2019 So, how mu 1 hour ago, frogfish said: to get the moment does not mean you should not look for composition. heiko Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Those two looks different from two initial photos. Were they taken with 50 1.1 and shallow DOF? :). Looking at those two it seems to be in the opposite. Wide lens and narrow apertures. Here is the reportage. Wide and f2.8 with AF. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frogfish Posted February 4, 2019 Author Share #18 Posted February 4, 2019 vor einer Stunde schrieb Ko.Fe.: So, how mu Those two looks different from two initial photos. Were they taken with 50 1.1 and shallow DOF? :). Looking at those two it seems to be in the opposite. Wide lens and narrow apertures. Here is the reportage. Wide and f2.8 with AF. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Oh man, what do you want to get proven? The first shot, the female dancer, was not posed either. It was not staged, shallow DOF. It is not a question of if it is possible, but of aesthetics. Here another example, unposed, pure candid, lots of movement. 35 at 2.0. But if you like reportage image the way you like to shoot, enjoy. heiko 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ko.Fe. Posted February 4, 2019 Share #19 Posted February 4, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, frogfish said: Oh man, what do you want to get proven? The first shot, the female dancer, was not posed either. It was not staged, shallow DOF. It is not a question of if it is possible, but of aesthetics. Here another example, unposed, pure candid, lots of movement. 35 at 2.0. But if you like reportage image the way you like to shoot, enjoy. heiko Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! I'm not proving anything here. I was just trying to figure out what barely in focus images in first two posts have to do with reportage. But nobody is perfect 50mm, @f2.8 (Summarit original) and we were both walking. Don't know why I used ISO50 film on this day. :). Edited February 4, 2019 by Ko.Fe. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frogfish Posted February 4, 2019 Author Share #20 Posted February 4, 2019 vor 2 Stunden schrieb Ko.Fe.: I'm not proving anything here. I was just trying to figure out what barely in focus images in first two posts have to do with reportage. But nobody is perfect 50mm, @f2.8 (Summarit original) and we were both walking. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Don't know why I used ISO50 film on this day. :). "I was just trying to figure out what barely in focus images in first two posts have to do with reportage." Ok, I tell you: they are reportage. Just a different way to tell a story, to convey an emotion of the situation. "But nobody is perfect" If I might, even if not get asked for help. To improve your photography you might learn to watch the background of your images. Oh, and I believe the shot above is not at 2.8, way too much DOF. Have a nice day, buddy... heiko Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.