Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/01/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Walt, > Austin, if it is in fact a technique, it's one we ALL use...and > for the most > part, take for granted. If we take it for granted, then I wouldn't really call it "using". Yes, it's there, more or less, depending on what aperture one shoots at, but being conscious of how it effects the image, and purposely "using" it to enhance the image is, IMO, using it. > It's a simple fact that OOF areas are affected by the design of > the lens and > the diaphragm shape...just look at a "mirror" lens result for > proof...some like > it, some don't....I don't... > I'm just commenting that the "bokeh" or lack thereof has little > to do with the > MANUFACTURER Of course it has everything to do with the manufacturer...in as much as it can be controlled. You just said above it is effected by the design of the lense and the diaphragm shape...isn't that something that the manufacturer chooses? > ...and that most working photographers accept the OOF > areas with > little or no comment... I understand, it's a type of photography that doesn't typically warrant being conscious of bokeh. I agree. But, that doesn't mean there aren't other "types" of photography that don't benefit from it. Austin - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html