Re: [Leica] What is bad bokeh?

["Jeff S" <segawa@netone.com>]

John,
A number of months ago, Photo Techniques had a handful of very good articles
describing "boke" (pronounced "bo keh"). Believe it was the June '97 issue,
and if back issues are still available, well worth seeking--they have photos
to illustrate! What I found especially interesting were the statements that
Canon, Nikon and others know how to design it into a lens, and in fact,
sometimes do.

What I mostly notice in a lens which is good at it is that optically, it's a
good balance, maybe flaring a bit easily, but in a way resulting in
localized loss of contrast, not a ugly light blotch surrounded by entirely
flare-free bits, and perhaps not seeming to be razor-sharp or ultra high
contrast, but producing a nice, smooth (not soft!) consistency which
encourages experimentation with large apertures and shallow depth of field.

Among others, I've really enjoyed using a late '60s 80/2.8 Zeiss Planar on a
Rolleiflex SL66-wonderful setup for macro use, where shallow depth of field
is unavoidable.

Other optics, such as the 75 and 150mm Mamiya Six lenses, and various MF
Fujinons, have been very different beasts, capable of dazzling, razor-sharp,
contrasty results, but for the most part, I preferred to have no significant
out-of-focus elements in my shots, or if it were unavoidable, chose
relatively featureless elements.

For most shooting, I've found that good boke, accompanied by a slight loss
of apparent sharpness and contrast, is easier to live with than dazzling
apparent sharpness and contrast (crispy critters!), and so-so boke, but
certain accomodations can be made--I got a number of good cityscapes and
some brilliant 'chromes from the Fujis and Mamiyas--I just toss out the ones
that show out-of-focus gremlins :-)

Jeff

PS: The visual gremlins that I toss out quickest are: backlit dark foliage
with hexagonal highlights, annoyingly hard-edged (despite being out of
focus!) background elements or clumped-up dark masses

- -----Original Message-----
From: John McLeod <johnmcleod@worldnet.att.net>
>I have a passing familiarity with what "bokeh" is, but am curious if there
>is a consensus on what good bokeh is (compared with, say, "bad" bokeh :)  ?