Bokeh -post your best pls (Part 2)

So seeing as this is called post your best bokeh, you must think that they are all the best?

dexy101 wrote in post #16188445
So seeing as this is called post your best bokeh, you must think that they are all the best?

I think lots of folks are posting photo's just because they can; best blur is in the eye of the beholder

Rocky Rhode wrote in post #16189476
I think lots of folks are posting photo's just because they can; best blur is in the eye of the beholder

I agree with this statement. Best or not, clearly many people don't understand the real meaning of the word "bokeh". But I won't open that can of worms as I'm sure "bokeh vs. Blur" has been debated for way longer than I have been around this forum. I also find it kind of funny that there are two virtually identical threads for "bokeh" images.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/coryshuler/9453​819749/

Blurry photos have nothing in focus, how could anyone misunderstand the difference between the two? If what the photog wanted in focus is in focus, then it wouldn't be blur. I haven't seen many pics here with nothing at all in focus. I am finding that I like to have recognizable shapes in the bokeh, nothing more beautiful that some dark mansion or house in the distance but still brooding over the entire scene. I love the mood those shapes can cast of the feeling of a pic.

idsurfer wrote in post #16189548
I agree with this statement. Best or not, clearly many people don't understand the real meaning of the word "bokeh". But I won't open that can of worms as I'm sure "bokeh vs. Blur" has been debated for way longer than I have been around this forum. I also find it kind of funny that there are two virtually identical threads for "bokeh" images.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/coryshuler/9453​819749/

A couple more.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/75139101@N06/8​753035782/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/75139101@N06/8​695804865/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/75139101@N06/8​571220802/

guitarjeff wrote in post #16190033
Blurry photos have nothing in focus, how could anyone misunderstand the difference between the two? If what the photog wanted in focus is in focus, then it wouldn't be blur. I haven't seen many pics here with nothing at all in focus. I am finding that I like to have recognizable shapes in the bokeh, nothing more beautiful that some dark mansion or house in the distance but still brooding over the entire scene. I love the mood those shapes can cast of the feeling of a pic.

I was not referring to a blurry photo. The post above mine used the word blur to refer to the background blur. The inaccuracy that people tend to have is that they use the words "bokeh and blur" synonymously. A quick google search will help someone differentiate between the two. On a side note, i share the same feelings as you about the type of "out of focus" background i find interesting. I actually like to be able to distinguish what it is while having the subject pop out in the foreground.

I see, and yeah, I agree. It is incredible how shapes of things we recognize can impact the emotion in a photo. I seem to recall some old movie poster of the "Texas Chainsaw" movie i think and that darn house haunted me for years. I guess I saw it at a tender age, lol.

I was just thinking earlier that it might be cool to have like a bird model thing, something that looks very real like a taxidermy bird and be able to set it somewhere and then do creative things with shapes in the background. Hmm. Even live birds are frozen in photos, so a taxidermy bird with a stand could be fun, for a few shots anyway.

idsurfer wrote in post #16190890
I was not referring to a blurry photo. The post above mine used the word blur to refer to the background blur. The inaccuracy that people tend to have is that they use the words "bokeh and blur" synonymously. A quick google search will help someone differentiate between the two. On a side note, i share the same feelings as you about the type of "out of focus" background i find interesting. I actually like to be able to distinguish what it is while having the subject pop out in the foreground.

My impression of what i thought bokeh was about

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/lenzfreak/83397​27207/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/lenzfreak/83397​24573/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/lenzfreak/85796​71167/