Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/08/28

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Bokeh vs. Nukeh
From: Guy Bennett <guybnt@idt.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 12:26:25 +0100
References: <001e01c0109d$1f620000$84a6cbd8@niki>

>on 27/8/00 11:07 pm, Mark Rutledge at markrut@ticnet.com wrote:
>
>> Maybe bokeh has more to do with the "art" aspect of photography rather than
>> the technical side. Emotion vs quantifiability. Images (painting, photos..)
>> can move us in a way we cannot describe...beauty isn't measurable. Just a
>> guess!
>
>I think bokeh is pretty measurable. Just no-one measures it yet. It's pretty
>simple...
>
>[snipple]
>
>You don't care about bokeh? Fine. But my point of view is that a
>photographer should be in charge of every element of his/her craft. Grain,
>tonality, sharpness, bokeh and so on. Of course everyone knows the picture
>comes first. But photography is a craft as well as an art.
>
>Why do I care? I just developed twenty five rolls. Pretty much all of it was
>shot wide open on either the 35/1.4 or the TE 90/2.8. I have way more stuff
>out of focus than in focus. Thank God for nice bokeh!
>
>Johnny Deadman


i wanted to throw in my own 2 cents on this issue, but couldn't put it more
eloquently than this.

johnny, i appreciate your comments on bokeh, nukeh, hokeh, pokeh, etc., as
well as your contributions in general.

been meaning to say it for a while.

guy

In reply to: Message from "Mark Rutledge" <markrut@ticnet.com> (Re: [Leica] Bokeh vs. Nukeh)