Bokehism - New Movement, Compositional Crutch, Status Symbol or None of the Above?

[Kwesi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Over the last 5 years or so I've noticed an increasing trend where all lens manufacturers are producing super fast and relatively expensive lenses which seem to be purchased primarily for producing images in broad daylight where some tiny insignificant portion of the image is in focus and the majority of the image is thrown out of focus.

Are we on the verge of a new movement? or is this simply a Veblen fad that will pass?

Your thoughts please.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[AndreasG]

100% consent from my side, it seems to be fashion that the bokeh is more important than the object of the photo.

[Erato]

Genre of Market Position

• Leader: Largest share
• Challenger: Medium share, to challenge the leader
• Follower: No offensive posture against the leader
• Nicher: Small market size, segmentation other firms cannot think of

Bokeh comes with a given focal length, amount of blades, aperture, and distance. It could be one of the signatures.

Some people take it as a benchmark, but it's not an appropriate thinking pattern from many aspects.

Edited April 5, 2021 by Erato

[frame-it]

52 minutes ago, Kwesi said:

Over the last 5 years or so I've noticed an increasing trend where all lens manufacturers are producing super fast and relatively expensive lenses which seem to be purchased primarily for producing images in broad daylight where some tiny insignificant portion of the image is in focus and the majority of the image is thrown out of focus.

 

i first noticed this campaign at Leica Hong Kong in 2016..that's 5 years ago..

https://us.leica-camera.com/Stores-Dealers/Point-of-Experience/Point-of-Experience/Bokeh

Edited April 5, 2021 by frame-it

[otto.f]

1 hour ago, Kwesi said:

? or is this simply a Veblen fad that will pass?

As I understand this concept, Veblen fads in general will never pass. But in Leica history, as it seems to me, the latest Karbe debauchery, starting with Thambar running along Noctilux 75  with the latest price-quality-functionality ratio score of the APO 35 (compare for instance the Voigtlander apo lanthar) this Veblen fad is unsurpassed. In the old days there were some jokes with the golden M6 for mister Phumibol and the HERMES versions for a slightly broader public, but these latest developments are close to perversions. 
Bokeh as such is a discussion on its own, but the way this concept is abused for asking prices is insane. 

Edited April 5, 2021 by otto.f

[colint544]

It's become mainstream, so destined for ubiquity, just like slow-motion video and tilt/shift. It will become ordinary.

I was shown an iPhone 12 portrait this morning, and the software-generated background blur is astonishing. Individual hairs on the subject's head stand out against it. Very soon, everyone with a phone will be able to generate such images.

[Kwesi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 minutes ago, colint544 said:

It's become mainstream, so destined for ubiquity, just like slow-motion video and tilt/shift. It will become ordinary.

I was shown an iPhone 12 portrait this morning, and the software-generated background blur is astonishing. Individual hairs on the subject's head stand out against it. Very soon, everyone with a phone will be able to generate such images.

I believe the portrait mode feature in the latest iPhones is a direct response to the bokeh craze

[colint544]

Just now, Kwesi said:

I believe the portrait mode feature in the latest iPhones is a direct response to the bokeh craze

Yes, it was always an area where phone cameras couldn't compete with cameras with large aperture lenses. The other problem with phones was they were terrible in bad light. The sensors in phones are about the size of a grain of rice. But the software is so powerful now, these are problems no more.

I don't think it's a bad thing at all that such effects have been democratised. It means we can no longer be lazy photographers and use bokeh, telephoto compression, and all the rest of it as 'get out of jail free' cards. We need to keep elevating our craft.

[adan]

Present at the Creation

As someone who has been doing photography since the age of 16 (1970), here's my perspective.

Large-aperture lens were originally created strictly for purposes of taking pictures in "available darkness." No one gave much of a damn about how the blurry backgrounds were rendered. Especially Leitz/Leica - whom, we should remember, were "followers" (or at best, "challengers"). Zunow, Zeiss, Canon and Nikon all produced various 50mm f/1.1 to f/0.95 (or even "faster") lenses well before Leitz got around to producing the first Noctilux f/1.2.

Note the term "faster lens" - which meant a lens that let in so much light that one could use relatively fast shutter speeds to capture fast movement and avoid camera shake even in low light.

But even they were not the first - Ernemann revolutionized photography with their medium-format Ernostar 65-to-100mm f/1.8s in the 1920s; famously used to record history in the making in dark conference rooms by Erich Salomon.

(linked from wikipedia - French Prime Minister Aristide Briand and group,  Peace Conference, 1931, Erich Salomon, Ernostar  f/1.8 on Ermanox camera)

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 upgraded from a Nikkor f/2.5 to  a Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 in 1976 so that I could (just barely, Tri-X at EI 3200 or thereabouts) take night-time pictures like this under only one "available" 500-watt floodlight, 30 meters from the subject.

Dirt Track Racer on a Saturday Night, 1977

Throughout the 1970s, lens makers pushed the limits further with faster longer lenses - 180mm f/2.8s at the start of the decade, 300mm f/2.8s by the end of the decade. Again, for professionals to complete sports assignments under poor light (and before it became the norm for venues to allow the installation of remote strobes in the rafters).

I.E. such (very expensive) lenses were created under pressure from Sports Illustrated and other magazines or newspapers.

Now - subject separation using narrow depth of field was already a fairly well-known technique, and it was noticed that these new long fast lenses did that far better (or at least far more) than even a 50mm f/1.0.

I recall the first time a newspaper photographer on a fashion shoot decided to borrow the 300 f/2.8 from the Sports Department to really isolate his models from the backgrounds - around 1980±. Won Pictures Of The Year - Newspapers in the "Illustrative Photography" category. So soon everyone was borrowing a 300 f/2.8 for non-sports assignments. It became a cliche of the disco era (rather like the Bee-Gees ).

And eventually it was noticed that certain lenses produced "better" subject separation, by producing smoother blurry backgrounds, that contrasted better with the sharp main subject, and were less distracting. And not long after that, "bokeh" entered the language in the West.

It is a useful tool in achieving a larger goal. Emphasis on "tool." It is a hammer to be brought out when one's goal requires driving nails.

But just going through life driving nails into anything and everything as one's only goal - without actually building something more important in the process - is a rather pitiful existence.

 

Edited April 5, 2021 by adan

[Kwesi]

Thanks for the historical perspective Andy,

I remember back in the late 80's and early nineties looking at Leica photographers images made in very dim light in faraway exotic places captured by the unobtainable to me magical "Noctilux" and being in such awe of these photographers who had the privilege of traveling and using such special purpose lenses. I must admit it boggles my mind when i contrast it to today where people buy ultra fast lenses and ND filters just so they can be used at high noon!

[adan]

As a follow-up to the "tool" concept - and as expiation for posting a Nikon image above....

Here is a picture I made with the 75mm Summilux on an M9. It was my lead picture for a photo-essay about one of the US prison camps (Camp Amache) for Japanese-Americans in WW2.

I used the subject isolation, tight framing and the lovely bokeh of this lens with intent.

- to emphasize starkly the cruelty of the jagged barbed wire.

- to reflect the dreamy distance of 80-year-old memories.

- to simplify and stylize the forms and tones and "gray wash" in the manner of Japanese brush painting

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!

 

But I didn't overdo it! Here's another shot from the same essay - same overall brush-painting idea, but in a visual style I might call Amache-no-Bokeh ("Amache with nothing blurry").

Fallen Branch and Old Foundation. 35mm Summicron v.4 at f/8.

 

Edited April 5, 2021 by adan

[Dennis]

I always loved this quote: "I would rather be honest than impressive" ... For the topic I would say, I would choose 100 times context over bokeh.

 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, colint544 said:

Very soon, everyone with a phone will be able to generate such images.

Sadly they do. They are called "Selfies"..............

[pgk]

5 hours ago, AndreasG said:

100% consent from my side, it seems to be fashion that the bokeh is more important than the object of the photo.

I can remember the days before 'bokeh' when the only discussion about oof highlights was about those from mirror lenses. The general consensus was that these bright donuts did not appeal. I can't remember much comment about the variability of oof highlights from other lenses. Whilst the background can make an image I would struggle to remember any image which has ever impinged upon me dramatically because of the 'bokeh' on display within it, and I very much doubt it is of any significant interest to anyone who is not into photographic effects. Remember multi prism-filters anyone?

Edited April 5, 2021 by pgk

[BradS]

just another lame fad.

[Rick in CO]

5 hours ago, Erato said:

Bokeh comes with a given focal length, amount of blades, aperture, and distance. It could be one of the signatures.

And under-corrected spherical aberration, according to several learned sources.  I find it very interesting as to what constitutes "good bokeh" by various sources.

[lct]

Digital is the main culprit i suspect with higher shutter speeds allowing to shoot in daylight at full aperture and LV allowing to preview like we could not do in the past. Just more freedom of expression IMHO. 

[pop]

Shouldn't the term be "Bokononism" ?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Herr Barnack]

Leica M lenses have been the masters of bokeh for decades. 

IMHO what we are seeing today is a bunch of lens manufacturers jumping on the "me too" bandwagon.

Bokeh is nice, but content is king.  A lifeless image will not be magically transformed into a masterpiece simply because it was shot at f/1.4 - or wider.

 

 

Edited April 5, 2021 by Herr Barnack

[darylgo]

I see bokeh as  a backlash against the auto-everything-sharp (digital) photography, amongst other reasons.