So what is this mysterious bokeh? A couple people have mentioned it and I get the impression it involves the out of focusness of the background but I suspect their are subtleties I am missing. For example reviewers say the Canon 50mm 1.4 gets better bokeh than the 1.8. The word buttery was used. Surely I am not the only one unfamiliar with this term?
Constructive Critism is always welcome. I am here to learn so let me know how I can do better.
Canon Rebel XT Sigma 28-90mm (less used: Sigma 70-30mm and Canon 18-50mm kit, 430 Speedlite)
well, you are certainly not the only one unfamilar--its very common. I am not super at explaining things but I will try to anyhow. I am sure someone who is better than I am will chime in---
the out of focus part of an image is the bokeh, that part is simple enough. however there are qualities that are desirable and some that are not. many people don't know good from bad. when I first learned about bokeh, I saw an image that I thought was stunning, and I really thought the nicely defined circles of OOF area were so nice-- then I found out that that is NOT what you want. LOL You do want it as circular as possible, rather than some other geometric shape...and you want the circles to blur into nothingness rather than to be sharply defined. SO the more smoothly the "circles" blend into nothingness makes the background more "creamy"...or "buttery"
That is certainly a very short answer to a very complex issue...but its a decent summary I think.
~~Tammi~~
d300, MB-D10, sb800, sb400, 18-200VR, 18-50 f/2.8, 28-75 f/2.8, 90 f/2.8 macro, 50 f/1.4, Pocket wizards, sekonic L-358, and an aresnal of reflectors and other light modifiers....and maybe more. ;)
My Zenfolio Gallery
My Blog
Does anyone have some photos that illustrate this?
this is a good link! it explains things in much more depth than I could.
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/bokeh.html