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

[frame-it]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Fuji X-H1 + Leica 50mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH

 

Leica Store in Hong Kong

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 April 6, 2021 by frame-it

[Danner]

"f8 and be there"

[Advertisement]

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

[01maciel]

vor 7 Minuten schrieb frame-it:

Fuji X-H1 + Leica 50mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH

 

 

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!

Ha ha, a perfect photo to underline that the term 'Bokeh' is just marketing speech. I guess it is not worth to talk about the quality (to be defined in this context) and the existence of 'Bokeh'. It's just like talking about the quality re the checked pattern of a tweed jacket or the quality of Sauerkraut strings. 🍏🍊

[Ko.Fe.]

2 hours ago, Lee S said:

Don’t get me wrong (for MY taste) I think reducing the depth of field has purpose when done correctly, someone on this thread used it to isolate a barb wire which told a story as part of a series to great effect.

 

It can look great in environmental portraiture to emphasis a subject but still have enough detail that the background adds to the story, it can also be useful if you want to take a portrait and the background is too distracting, however I feel it is often overused when better composition can be had. You even said it yourself it makes it easy to make interesting photos to you. For me, shallow depth of field does not automatically equal interesting.

 

I’m including myself in that criticism, I have the 85mm F1.4 G Master (Considered one of the best Bokeh lenses ever) and 40mm F1.2, they stayed wide open and my photos got boring to ME. Soon the novelty wore off and I was sick of carrying around massive lenses, hence my move to M with smaller and lighter lens and all its limitations and my photography is better for it. 

My criticism is more aimed at the size of lenses these days.  There’s nothing wrong with a sharp lens wide open in the corner at F1.2 if that’s your thing but you pay for that in weight and size. Look at the sigma 35mm F1.2. 

That said photography is your art, you enjoy what you enjoy and I’m glad the tools are available to make photos you enjoy. 

There’s nothing wrong with the photo you took, you like it that’s all that matters, but what was the artistic purpose of having the turtle head in focus only? Would it be a more interesting photo if we got to see his full form. 

 

Rather than use a shallow DOF to get an interesting photo wouldn’t it be better to push yourself creatively and work with some limitations? 

Viogtlander is leading RF, M mount f1.2 market with latest not too big primes. Their latest 40 1.2, for example.

Sigma... I won't touch anything from Sigma with ten feet pole.

You will benefit with getting to  wider acceptance and willing to learn about what it is for others. Which includes people capabilities and situations. To have Leica gear, you have to be creative on making money first. It takes time. These days you have to be creative to be able to have disposable money for Leica.

Also, creativity in photography in terms of interesting is in huge spectrum. Some are interested in bokeh,  some are in f32 landscapes. Many have absolutely no interest in street photography with so called "f8 and be where". 

Older person who was able to get decent living, got his dream Noctlix and M10something. Is this person going to travel to photo fancy destinations? No. He comes at beach nearby and takes boat picture @1.1 on sunny day. It is this person creativity and joy. And here is absolutely nothing with it.  

And where are still those how could only afford M film beater and non Leica lens. Maybe not so many of them on LUF. But where are many film M users. And just like decades ago they benefit from f1.2 lens, but thanks to Viogtlander and eager Chinese manufacturers, it doesn't have to cost fortune now to be able to use film under low light.

Even more, where are still those who not jump on every digital M just because it was released yesterday. People are still using, buying M8/M9. Those are often finding f1.2 lenses to be practical. And some are able to see the difference between amplified high ISO on latest cameras and native, low ISO. ISO 400 is still preferred by many to ISO 40000. 

Just look around. Creative @f8 with Leica? To many of us it is outside world, full of free people. I don't know where you are, but I'm in the well populated area which is at its third lock down. Street photography, which is people is no go here. 

Yes, it is easy to create something cool by bokeh. Do you realize what 99% of those who takes photos are not creators, but users?

And here is nothing wrong with it. It is human nature. 99% won't become HCB, GW, VM and so on. No photo gear manufacturer would ever survive if they would make lenses only for creative genius. And creative genius won't get the gear without support of general public, which is buying photo gear for "just to see how it looks like to be photographed". Including@ f1.2

This gives less time 

[Guest Nowhereman]

3 hours ago, Lee S said:

...I think reducing the depth of field has purpose when done correctly...

I don't think the quality of bokeh its a matter of doing something correctly or not — it's a matter of judgment or taste with regard to how the out-of-focus areas of a photographic image are rendered. @adan, above, has given the history of how this developed and also a good example, the barbed wire one, of how bokeh may be use effectively. How important bokeh can be depends on how the photographer wants out-of-focus areas rendered — and whether this is a part of his aesthetic choice.

If you have a portrait, or another subject, where only, say, twenty percent of the frame is in focus and eighty percent is a focus blur because of narrow depth-of-field, the quality of that bokeh will be highly visible. It is not surprising that bokeh quality was first discussed in Japan, considering that publications such as Asahi Camera have had the most extensive technical discussions and reviews, and still do. This attention to bokeh in Japanese photography publications was also reflected in Japanese lens design — and Nikon, I believe, was the first to produce lenses with adjustable bokeh control, in their DC lenses. Among such types of lenses are the following:

• Nikon AF DC-NIKKOR 105mm f/2D – DC = Defocus Control
• Nikon AF DC-NIKKOR 135mm f/2D – DC = Defocus Control
• Sony 135mm f/2.8 – STF = Smooth Trans Focus
• Fujifilm XF 56mm f/1.2 R APD – APD = Apodization Filter
• Sigma 135mm f/2.8 YS – Focusing System

You can read about this in this article, together with a lot of more information on bokeh.
_______________________________________
Frog Leaping photobook and Instagram

[lct]

Hehe "f/8 and be there" to show boring details behind the pet you're shooting . Just kidding.

[Ko.Fe.]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 hours ago, petermullett said:

.....

In days of film ....

 

Excuse me... Yours "days of film".

I only started film for real in 2012. Film was still very cheap and cameras were from very cheap SLRS and such to not very expensive film Leicas, including M. I learned how to develop and print. I have tried every possible film format and printing from it under enlarger. I developed ECN-2, E6 and C-41 films.

Someone like you might declare it as "days of film", but it is far from be over.

"Why bother"?

I have traded, sold and purchased my film Ms and not too pricey M lenses mostly with young people. 

Where I'm most of them are not within oil countries distributed income. To them used M3 and cheap Chinese 50 f1.1 lens are not just the only possible entry point to decent rangefinder photography, but their preferable media in photography.  

The only LCS in Toronto which is thriving is Downtown Camera. They made recent move to larger place and their store front and such is with film. I'm the oldest film user where. I see young people of all kinds. Crowds. I remember how I was waiting inline to get film and it was group of young Muslim ladies buying Ilford film camera.

Even at LUF we have huge by number of pages film users photos thread. And even film M thread is thriving here.  

So, in fact, low iso films and fast primes is these days reality for many. 

[Anbaric]

1 hour ago, Nowhereman said:

I don't think the quality of bokeh its a matter of doing something correctly or not — it's a matter of judgment or taste with regard to how the out-of-focus areas of a photographic image are rendered. @adan, above, has given the history of how this developed and also a good example, the barbed wire one, of how bokeh may be use effectively. How important bokeh can be depends on how the photographer wants out-of-focus areas rendered — and whether this is a part of his aesthetic choice.

If you have a portrait, or another subject, where only, say, twenty percent of the frame is in focus and eighty percent is a focus blur because of narrow depth-of-field, the quality of that bokeh will be highly visible. It is not surprising that bokeh quality was first discussed in Japan, considering that publications such as Asahi Camera have had the most extensive technical discussions and reviews, and still do. This attention to bokeh in Japanese photography publications was also reflected in Japanese lens design — and Nikon, I believe, was the first to produce lenses with adjustable bokeh control, in their DC lenses. Among such types of lenses are the following:

• Nikon AF DC-NIKKOR 105mm f/2D – DC = Defocus Control
• Nikon AF DC-NIKKOR 135mm f/2D – DC = Defocus Control
• Sony 135mm f/2.8 – STF = Smooth Trans Focus
• Fujifilm XF 56mm f/1.2 R APD – APD = Apodization Filter
• Sigma 135mm f/2.8 YS – Focusing System

You can read about this in this article, together with a lot of more information on bokeh.
_______________________________________
Frog Leaping photobook and Instagram

Interesting article on the Nikon DC lens designer's thinking here:

https://imaging.nikon.com/history/story/0032/index.htm

Not only the first lenses with some control over this quality (though the change is pretty subtle at reasonable settings), but perhaps the first where out of focus rendering was a primary design consideration actively marketed by the manufacturer (not counting soft focus lenses like the Thambar - the DC lenses are really sharp).

[pgk]

2 hours ago, Nowhereman said:

..... and Nikon, I believe, was the first to produce lenses with adjustable bokeh control, in their DC lenses.

Variably soft focus lenses have been around for a long time; 1866 according to this: https://antiquecameras.net/softfocuslenses.html. Dallmeyer's lens allowed for adjustment of the amount of spherical aberration from the lens, but his lens itself derived from the earlier Petzval (a fast f/3ish) design which also had highly characteristic 'bokeh'. Dallmeyer's design aroused controversy in its time just as 'bokeh' does today. Do things really change?

Edited April 6, 2021 by pgk

[Herr Barnack]

6 hours ago, 01maciel said:

Looks like someone kicked off a bokeh bashing thread 😲
IMHO The only thing what's left for hobby photographers is the consciously use of DOF. The result can be truly inspirational photographs and worth to look at. For everything-flat-and-sharp daylight snapshots the smartphone is a perfect tool which simply adapts the means to the end.

DOF seems to be the only field and expertise what's left for brands like Leica, Fuji you name it, and they all know it very well. Hence the major marketing attacks for lenses like Noctilux 1.2, APO's, Fujinon XF 1,0/50 etc. The people love it. It's a way of life. I suppose that wise old saying applies to most of us: You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar 🐝

🍯

Is the use of bokeh to be Instagram's next photographic rat race?  It's starting to sound like it.

What an exercise in futility.

Forget Instagram, forget likes.  Forget social media in general.  Photograph what brings you satisfaction in a way that brings you contentment.  Dig deep and develop your photographic vision.  If your photographic ethos includes bokeh or shallow DOF, great.  If it doesn't, great. 

The intention should be to make arresting, interesting images that you find accomplishment, satisfaction and contentment in. 

JMHO...

 

 

Edited April 6, 2021 by Herr Barnack

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Ko.Fe. said:

Excuse me... Yours "days of film".

I only started film for real in 2012. Film was still very cheap and cameras were from very cheap SLRS and such to not very expensive film Leicas, including M. I learned how to develop and print. I have tried every possible film format and printing from it under enlarger. I developed ECN-2, E6 and C-41 films.

Someone like you might declare it as "days of film", but it is far from be over.

"Why bother"?

I have traded, sold and purchased my film Ms and not too pricey M lenses mostly with young people. 

Where I'm most of them are not within oil countries distributed income. To them used M3 and cheap Chinese 50 f1.1 lens are not just the only possible entry point to decent rangefinder photography, but their preferable media in photography.  

The only LCS in Toronto which is thriving is Downtown Camera. They made recent move to larger place and their store front and such is with film. I'm the oldest film user where. I see young people of all kinds. Crowds. I remember how I was waiting inline to get film and it was group of young Muslim ladies buying Ilford film camera.

Even at LUF we have huge by number of pages film users photos thread. And even film M thread is thriving here.  

So, in fact, low iso films and fast primes is these days reality for many. 

No disagreement from me, Ko.Fe., of course "days of film" are not over, for you, for many others, for me neither and I certainly didn't mean to imply that. I still own and use film cameras from way back before digital times, I even bought a new MA a while ago, so I'm no stranger to that world and at times I've missed the discipline of working in it.....and yes like you I process the films I've shot in whatever film camera I still have, 35, 120 and yes 4x5 film format too. As most of my working life was in using regular film in photography and motion picture work I'm delighted at the "resurrection" of film use in both mediums, no question about it. Happy to learn you've a thriving base there in Toronto.............And yes, I know of our Leica Forum pages too, I've participated in it frequently and  posted images there myself.

As I said to another member my comments were purely personal in saying that for me one of the "gifts" of using a M10 series camera with it's once unimaginable ISO sensitivity is that I can use smaller, slower, lenses without much compromise, for me that's a gift, for others maybe not so much. We all approach our photography differently and use different tools in many different ways, whatever floats your boat......it's all good.

[BrianS]

Linked imaged in flickr no longer showing up.

 

Edited April 6, 2021 by BrianS

[01maciel]

vor 50 Minuten schrieb Herr Barnack:

Is the use of bokeh to be Instagram's next photographic rat race?  It's starting to sound like it.

Not sure what you are talking about. Instagram? Not my point, sounds a little bit cheesy, but it's nicely displayed.

vor einer Stunde schrieb Herr Barnack:

The intention should be to make arresting, interesting images that you find accomplishment, satisfaction and contentment in. 

The bold 'you' (4 times) indicates to me what's best for me and others from your point of view;) yeah right, and that's why we are posting hundreds and thousands of photos every day 😁

[Kwesi]

Wow! Some very thought provoking comments here so far, thanks everyone.

 

[Kwesi]

8 hours ago, 01maciel said:

Looks like someone kicked off a bokeh bashing thread 😲

No agenda at all. Just curious as to how forum members feel about the use of bokeh as subject

[Kwesi]

16 hours ago, Ko.Fe. said:

I had Canon 50L and Canon 5D. I used this kit @f1.2 often for portraits from distance with enough DOF to have face in focus. It was close to 4x5 film photography (I also did, including matching enlarger) DOF and rendering, but zero hassle. I used AF Servo and placing AF point where I need it. It was not limited just by RF patch in the middle. But I have seen f1.2 RF lenses portraits well done.

I have now Canon RP and 50 1.8 RF. Good rendering. But no cigar.

Those who can't take portraits with shallow DOF for different reasons are still enjoying shallow DOF rendering. Basically shallow DOF allows to get interesting picture with minimal effort and on digital. 

Honestly, I see nothing wrong in it.

What is wrong with this picture, tell me?

M-E 220 with VF III and odd lens.

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!

What is wrong with lens been sharp @f1.2? And have you ever noticed how faster lenses have different bokeh if not wide open. Like Leica Noctilux OOF @5.6?

Hi Ko.Fe,

Personally i don't think there is anything wrong with your photo. You asked for a critique so here is my two cents worth. I think your image works largely because it is monochromatic and so your in/out of focus areas are in harmony and the transition is quite smooth. it feels as if your turtle is waking from a dream, head first, with the out of focus body still in slumber.

As others have said bokeh, when used judiciously, can greatly enhance an image and direct your viewer to read it as the artist intended.

It is also true that the vast majority of bokeh infused images we come across say far more about the lens than the artist.

[Ouroboros]

On 4/5/2021 at 6:12 PM, adan said:

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.

 

The most popular way to suppress one's own creativity, as if it were needed.  Stultifying, I gave up looking a long time ago.

[Herr Barnack]

2 hours ago, 01maciel said:

Not sure what you are talking about. Instagram? Not my point, sounds a little bit cheesy, but it's nicely displayed.

The bold 'you' (4 times) indicates to me what's best for me and others from your point of view yeah right, and that's why we are posting hundreds and thousands of photos every day 😁

@01maciel it seems that you have misunderstood my intent.  My reference to Instagram was not to imply that you were referring to Instagram in your post.  IG was mentioned as a reference to the online rat race for "likes" that many photographers participate in, and how pointless it is when we think about the world of photography as a whole.

The bold 'you' (4 times) was used merely for emphasis.  Maybe I should have used italics instead.  I am not in the business of telling other photographers what they "should" do, which was my whole point. 

In terms of photography - photograph subject matter that you like using whatever techniques that you find produce pleasing results; that is my approach.  Unless money is changing hands and you are photographing for a paying client, trying to guess what kind of images others will like is a losing proposition and a path to disillusionment.

[MrFriendly]

On 4/5/2021 at 11:07 AM, otto.f said:

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)

debauchery?? how much is a compact APO 35 supposed to cost?  and why does it cost what it costs, specially compared to Voitlander and others.  Those are questions nobody seems to be able to answer.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Guest]

So what is the point of this thread?

Bokeh is bad? noctilux users are imbecile idiots?  fast lenses are a total waste of time unless its dark?

I dont get it to be honest but on social media its always fun to hammer somebody or other i guess?