RE: [Rollei] OT: Nice image but bad bokeh -- look!

["Austin Franklin" <darkroom >]

I actually think the bokeh is quite good, it's just the harsh lighting
that's not.  In some pictures, that type of rendering of harsh lighting
looks very good, and some, obviously, it's distracting.

Austin


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rollei  us
> [mailto:owner-rollei  On Behalf Of Kotsinadelis,
> Peter (Peter)
> Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 5:28 PM
> To: rollei  us
> Subject: RE: [Rollei] OT: Nice image but bad bokeh -- look!
>
>
>
>
> Two comments.  First, the only people who complained about boek are
> those on the RUG.  No comments were noted as such on the comments
> associated with the photograph.
> Secondly, it it hard to eliminate those harsh shadows where lighting is
> so bright in the background regardless of lens.  I would almost bet you
> the photographer used an aperture of about F5.6 considering the depth of
> field and lens.
> If a wider aperture it would lose the selective focus including the
> motorcycle but your bokeh would have been better.  Given a choice, I
> think the photographer did very well.  It is always easy to judge for
> those that have a hard time doing.
>
> Peter K
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rick Huber [mailto:rhuber  ]
> Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 1:00 PM
> To: rollei  us
> Subject: Re: [Rollei] OT: Nice image but bad bokeh -- look!
>
>
>
> R.J.
>
> I have to agree, the highlights in the trees look awful. It's really too
>
> bad because the photo is otherwise very good.
>
> Rick H.
>
> At 03:34 PM 5/30/2003 -0400, you wrote:
> >I was looking through the images on Photo.net and saw this recent image
> >taken with a Hasselblad Planar FE f/2 110mm no less:
> >
> >http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1520408
> >
> >To me, this is an example of bad bokeh. It really ruins the image IMO.
> >Sorry to dredge this up again but this image is a prime example.
> >
> >R.J.
>
>
>

------------------------------