Toronto Photography Meetup Group

f1.4 bokeh on 35mm format
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/ste823/3399493555/" title="62720008 by StE823, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3542/3399493555_31879a7ae4.jpg" width="500" height="332" alt="62720008"></a>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/thericyip/3773896151/" title="Vespa 150 by thericyip, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3578/3773896151_f385eff582.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="Vespa 150"></a>

Panasonic G1 + JML 25mm f0.95 TV Lens @ f0.95

bokeh from computer monitor! haha

F4 @ 65mm from 24-105mm 4L IS on 1.6x crop

don't know if its good or not, but there is lots of it
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/ajcgn/3713751259/" title="Cardinal Feeding its Young by ajcgn, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3425/3713751259_8aa22e5ab5.jpg" width="500" height="358" alt="Cardinal Feeding its Young"></a>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/burlapjacket/3314729227/" title="cigar store indian by Burlap Jacket, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3365/3314729227_ed874de0e8.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="cigar store indian"></a>
Lens was the Canon 50/1.2 LTM.

This is worth a read <a href="http://www.dantestella.com/technical/opiate.html">Opiate of the masses: Bokeh</a>

This one is quite somethig. Bokeh and subjects as well. Good job.
Would love to have more than flickrs size and exif (which is striped by flickr)

Daniel

Thanks for the complement
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ajcgn/3713751259/sizes/o/
The cropping helped.
It was taken with my Olympus 510 at 200mm (50mm-200SWD lens), ISO 200, 250 shutter, f5.6
As someone said earlier, using a telephoto lens can yield strong bokeh results.

I can't quite compete with f/1.2

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/potatoeye/3791247650/" title="Out there by PotatoEYE, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2469/3791247650_4e6f28ce77_o.jpg" width="537" height="600" alt="Out there"></a>

Bokeh is so awesome, it is used in the latest barcodes.

http://web.media.mit.edu/~ankit/bokode/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bokode

I'm educating people on a forum board. Seems kind of rude.

Super Takumar 100mm f/4 on the 5D mkii.

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/nub4life/3787833926/" title="holy macro! by Wendy Shaky Hands, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3527/3787833926_c1509ecc0a.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="holy macro!"></a>

EF 24-105 @105 ~ f4

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/cephalosporin/3791257773/" title="Happy Wednesday by YYZDez, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2493/3791257773_ab1d4f3f28.jpg" width="500" height="500" alt="Happy Wednesday"></a>

When quantity over-does quality

http://www.pbase.com/ssanneru/image/93312912

This line comes from Roger Hicks from RFF. I have an urge of quoting it here

Roger Hicks (on bokeh): ....
In most good pictures it is at best very secondary, and it is often unnoticeable, which is as it should be. It's like the fashion designer who said that if a woman wore one of the dresses he had designed, and people said, "What a beautiful dress," he had failed, but if they said, "What a beautiful woman," he had succeeded.

If bokeh is one of the first things you notice, the chances are that either it's not a good picture, or you are pointlessly obsessed with it.

Well said
+1

Am I the only one who immediately thought of one particular TPMG member when reading this? lol

We know
Bokeh is like garnish
That is all
This was from G1. The old Canon powershot G1 not the current one





If you feel like counting babe facial hair go for this

http://www.pbase.com/danieltong/image/61450098/original



Daniel

<img src="http://www.ljplus.ru/img4/m/o/moontemple/_MG_2110.jpg" alt='178.05 &#1050;&#1041;'>

and one more
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/potatoeye/3825848143/" title="_MG_2095 by PotatoEYE, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3516/3825848143_c48403b396_o.jpg" width="600" height="400" alt="_MG_2095"></a>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/thericyip/3827053969/" title="Sometimes, you just gotta lose focus by thericyip, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2589/3827053969_5618e4c159.jpg" width="500" height="281" alt="Sometimes, you just gotta lose focus"></a>

Yeah, I think he's right. If you notice the bokeh it's because you didn't notice what should have been the most important aspect - a subject, a story, an emotion...bokeh is essentially something created by the lens. It doesn't take too much skill to create. A good lens will create good bokeh in the out of focus areas.
Granted there are MANY examples in this thread of where the photographer purposely used bokeh as a creative element. That is good. However, many examples exist where there was no forethought to the bokeh - it just was just coincidental and it is one of the few interesting elements of the shot (and totally unplanned).

OK - rant over. Yes, yes, I know....don't worry...I'll show myself out.