Am I the only one that does not like Bokeh?

frankwite wrote in post #12389425
I'm referring to what the OP asked in his/her post not title. Even in the title he/she doesn't ask for a definition of bokeh or did I misread it!!!

Any answers to the question in the title are worthless unless the OP and the person responding are using the same definition of the word bokeh and the OPs first post indicated that they were not using the same definition as the people responding.

Or would you prefer that I respond to the OP with "I agree completely. I really hate it when the sky is all gray and overcast?" If we're going to make up definitions for words as we go along then we might as well use bokeh to mean "cloudy, gray skies", right?

frankwite wrote in post #12389425
I'm referring to what the OP asked in his/her post not title. Even in the title he/she doesn't ask for a definition of bokeh or did I misread it!!!

And what if the title were 'Large aperture: DOF or diffraction?', and the OP starts talking about the issue of 'deep DOF vs. diffraction at apertures like f/22' ...should we not correct the word 'large' to the proper 'small', with the explanation of why?

I think that good bokeh in this image makes it more appealing than if the background were to be in focus. Just my opinion however.

Man, we have reached the point where someone has to try to give examples of how effective use of selective focus is a genuinely useful photographic technique with profound effects on the aesthetics of a photograph? Really?

The answer to the OP's question is, "likely you are one of the very few." The only thing that might be added, for educational value, is that for generations, photographers have understood the value of selective focus (which is what the thread is about, but very weak understanding of photographic terms tends to obscure the meaning). If the OP, or any others with various, and obvious in at least one case, levels of inexperience want to suggest that selective focus is not what they like for some reason, then don't use it.

What else is there to say?

rral22 wrote in post #12390351
Man, we have reached the point where someone has to try to give examples of how effective use of selective focus is a genuinely useful photographic technique with profound effects on the aesthetics of a photograph? Really?

What are you talking about?????? This is a freaking photography website, and it is a discussion forum. Maybe ALL answers should meerly be yes and no, that way no one can benifit from anything at all. God, this has gotten stupid.

I like to say thank you to the members who have given me some good advice and suggestions with DOF now I will read and learn.

Thanks too.

jj_glos, Krb, alpga_1976, yogestce, TeamSpeed.

Also Pete, and Jon mods for keeping this thread inline.

Come back and tell us what you learn and what you like or don't like.

rral22 wrote in post #12390351
Man, we have reached the point where someone has to try to give examples of how effective use of selective focus is a genuinely useful photographic technique with profound effects on the aesthetics of a photograph? Really?

For me, the jury is still out if your are being serious or just showing some sarcasm?

TeamSpeed wrote in post #12392846
Come back and tell us what you learn and what you like or don't like.

At the weekend I will take more pictures and use the info given to me on what I like and don't I also will also post some pictures here for suggestions.

thanks again

It depends.

Another website had a demo of different DOF photos with the background totally blurry to totally in focus (and everything in between) - it was a great photo so all the shots looked great...

Different Bokeh's for different Folka's...

yogestee wrote in post #12392852
For me, the jury is still out if your are being serious or just showing some sarcasm?

Sarcasm. But serious too.

I really don't think there is anything to be gained in trying to show someone some perfectly good examples like DM1975's rider which is a great shot showing the ability of selective focus to control the "message" if the picture. If the power of the out of focus part of photography isn't obvious to the OP, or any others who dislike "Bokeh" (as it was misused at the start) a thousand more won't do it.

I guess I was "inspired" by the obvious elephant-in-the-forum that some on this thread are very poor at taking good advice, far less experienced than admitted, and are lying about stuff. Ironically (leading to sarcasm perhaps) much genuine effort was made by more patient forum members than I.

Eventually, after many years in my case, you find that it takes up much less time to just try to help out then egg on a bad or misconstrued attitude.

Then again, every once in a while, I forget that experience and revert.