Re: [Leica] WAS: Bokeh'm somebody, naw nuke it! ;-)

["Ted Grant" <tedgrant@home.com>]

Ray Moth wrote:
>>>> 1. The importance of bokeh depends a lot on one's type of photography.
For example, both wildlife and portrait photography can be enhanced by good
bokeh or can be marred by the lack thereof.<<<<

Hi Ray,
I know what you mean, however before anyone came up with a name for this
part of a photograph it "didn't mean nuthin'!"

Has it made for better pictures since it's description and now a topic? I
doubt it very much, or maybe in the case of a few photographers once they
heard what a "good thing" it was supposed to be, they deliberately bought a
lens for the effect.

Is this going to make for better picture content? Not likely. Is it going to
make for a "prettier" background? Possibly. But not likely for the general
public, nor many hard working professional photographers and avid amateurs
who still don't understand it, nor have the time of day wasting grey matter
over the effect. As generally they are far more concerned in taking damn
fine photographs without all the banality of what the hell Bokeh is, was, or
that it ever existed.

I can't imagine even worrying about what the back ground is going to look
like as it's hard enough to get smashing good pictures for content to start
with. Concerning oneself over an effect that in 99.9% of the time means
diddly squat to a good photograph.

I can't imagine Eddy Adams concerning himself with the bokeh effect when he
shot his Pulitzer photograph of the VC getting his head blown off.

In all my years I never heard one word about this effect and it wasn't until
a few years ago when the Japanese described it, did it then became a name
for the out of focus part of the picture .

> 2. Most high quality lenses (especially Leica) render good bokeh so
> it's usually a non-issue. However, there are still some "dogs" out
> there and, if you see a picture with significant out-of-focus areas
> taken using a lens with ugly bokeh, it's not a pretty sight!<<<<

Be that as it may, it didn't mean diddly until the Japanese came up with a
name and if that never happened we'd not be discussing this as we are today.

In fact I'd venture to say if we were not made aware of this effect there
wouldn't be any "dog bohek " lenses as you describe, well they'd be there,
but no one would realize they were dog lenses. Just as there wouldn't be
anyone realizing the out of focus effect rendered by Leica glass is great
bohek..   It was just there and so what!

Probably I'm more ambivalent about it as I've done a tremendous amount of
wide open or nearly so shooting where the effect is most obvious, so the out
of focus background was always there with the in focus part always the most
important aspect. It's certainly where I want my viewers to be looking!

I suppose it means something to people who specialize in fine art
photography as well as some portrait people, but to the general shooters of
the world it still "don't mean nuthin'"  ;-)
ted

Ted Grant Photography Limited
www.islandnet.com/~tedgrant