About Bokeh
bokehtests.com
About Bokeh
1–10 of 89 posts
Re: About Bokeh
#2And its all done in software (or ML) with recent phones to get around the lack of a good lenses system. And for most people it seems to work satisfactorily.
This has been one of the complaints against camera manufactures recently, that the firmware on the cameras is wildly archaic.
Re: About Bokeh
#3And its all done in software (or ML) with recent phones to get around the lack of a good lenses system. And for most people it seems to work satisfactorily. This has been one of the complaints against camera manufactures recently, that the firmware on the cameras is wildly archaic.
It works horribly with hair and sharp edges even on the flagship phones.
Plus it can't possibly work correctly with transparent and semi-transparent objects like glass.
Re: About Bokeh
#4And its all done in software (or ML) with recent phones to get around the lack of a good lenses system. And for most people it seems to work satisfactorily. This has been one of the complaints against camera manufactures recently, that the firmware on the cameras is wildly archaic.
im curious to see how good it will get in like 5-10 years because right now, to a mildly trained eye its very noticeably bad
Re: About Bokeh
#5One of my favorite Bokeh lenses is the Nikon 500mm reflex telephoto lens. The "Mak" style with a rear primary mirror and a front secondary works a lot like common compact telescopes. The Bokeh is tricky to apply, it's a fixed zoom telephoto lens so your subject must be at least 10 meters or so a way and it's hard to handhold, but the "donut" aperture of the lens makes for some very cool (or weird depending on your tastes) effects. The article calls this a "bad" lens but I love the effect.
Re: About Bokeh
#6And its all done in software (or ML) with recent phones to get around the lack of a good lenses system. And for most people it seems to work satisfactorily. This has been one of the complaints against camera manufactures recently, that the firmware on the cameras is wildly archaic.
As a photographer I really don't ever want to use the camera software. Even when it's perfect for my application, I want RAW photographs because you have to fix so many other things before you ever get to special effects.
You need to crop, color correct, distortion correct, noise correct, exposure correct. Only after that would you ever really want to apply some kind of bokeh filter.
The entire reason to use a high end camera is to do it right. Camera software is never going to do it right until they start putting photoshop on cameras.
Re: About Bokeh
#7And its all done in software (or ML) with recent phones to get around the lack of a good lenses system. And for most people it seems to work satisfactorily. This has been one of the complaints against camera manufactures recently, that the firmware on the cameras is wildly archaic.
"the lack of a good lenses system"
This is very much a subjective interpretation and I don't mean to be picking at nits, however most smartphones have tremendous lens systems. They just happen to have a short focal length (e.g. 1.54mm, 4.25mm and 6mm on the iPhone 11). Depth of field is primarily a function of focal length, and the smaller the focal length the larger the depth of field. Which is why portrait photographers often use zoom lenses.
In the real world though 99% of the time what people are aiming for is simply sharp photos where the subject is in focus. That small focal length makes that much, much more likely, yielding a dramatically higher percentage of "keeper" photos. Shallow depth of field photos are a gimmick in most cases.
Re: About Bokeh
#8And its all done in software (or ML) with recent phones to get around the lack of a good lenses system. And for most people it seems to work satisfactorily. This has been one of the complaints against camera manufactures recently, that the firmware on the cameras is wildly archaic.
As a photographer I really don't ever want to use the camera software. Even when it's perfect for my application, I want RAW photographs because you have to fix so many other things before you ever get to special effects. You need to crop, color correct, distortion correct, noise correct, exposure correct. Only after that would you ever really want to apply some kind of bokeh filter. The entire reason to use a high e…
It's not the software that holds back phone cameras. It's the literal size and shape of the sensors and lens.
You can already shoot RAW on a phone, but putting Photoshop on the phone won't solve the lack of depth of field inherent to the lens and sensor setup.
Re: About Bokeh
#9One of my favorite Bokeh lenses is the Nikon 500mm reflex telephoto lens. The "Mak" style with a rear primary mirror and a front secondary works a lot like common compact telescopes. The Bokeh is tricky to apply, it's a fixed zoom telephoto lens so your subject must be at least 10 meters or so a way and it's hard to handhold, but the "donut" aperture of the lens makes for some very cool (or weird depending on your ta…
Almost anything can be used well for artistic effect.
Here are some shots from the Nikkor 500mm:
http://www.indeed.co.jp/blog/scrap2/lens/reflexnikkor_500mm_...
Re: About Bokeh
#10One of my favorite Bokeh lenses is the Nikon 500mm reflex telephoto lens. The "Mak" style with a rear primary mirror and a front secondary works a lot like common compact telescopes. The Bokeh is tricky to apply, it's a fixed zoom telephoto lens so your subject must be at least 10 meters or so a way and it's hard to handhold, but the "donut" aperture of the lens makes for some very cool (or weird depending on your ta…
Your definition conflicts with the author's.
1st paragraph:
>as I own this site, I get to define good and bad Bokeh for the purposes here! The other key term is “image.” Bokeh is a property of IMAGES, not a property of LENSES.