• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

She says 1.4 bohka "is the best". ----


she could get a lensbaby and do tilt-shift on camera with out the need of the program
unless she wanted to tilt shift on the camera, and UNtilt-shift in PS ...
sounds like fun ... like putting the heat and ac on at the same time and seeing which one wins !
 
lxdude said:
I have a lens with a malfunctioning diaphragm which won't close, so it always produces "brokeh".

Click to expand...
I thought "brokeh" was what you became after you bought a Canon 85 1.2 L or an Aero Ektar.
 

I'm not an expert in Japanese language but, at the university where I work, I know the woman who teaches Japanese language and culture. I often ask her about things like this.

According to the way I understand, the word "boke" or "ボケ" (pronnounced "bokeh" in English) actually means "blurriness" or "having the quality of blur."

Therefore, what you say is right in line with the real meaning of the word.

When I was first getting serious about photography, learning how to develop my own film and make my own prints, short depth of field where the subject's nose was soft was simply called "out of focus." (Usually followed by, "Dammit!") Now they call it "art."
 
For pictures of flowers you have to have a lens with good bouquet.
 
And if you can find a big old lens and want to move some water you can call it "bucket".
 
Alex Muir said:
I thought the original post was really funny. I take it that was how it was intended ?
Click to expand...

Yes... depressingly funny.
I fired her. She couldn't believe it, and said it was my loss.
To much bravado, and self assurance, she was unteachable.
 
Sounds like she needs her background to be clearer, and more depth in her field.
 
Great thread to bring to light again. See so much of the same thing these days too.

I spend a great amount of time in reading and research to insure that when I say something, it's right. Damn upbringing!!

Blame it on my parents!!

Bob E.
 
SafetyBob said:
Great thread to bring to light again. See so much of the same thing these days too.

I spend a great amount of time in reading and research to insure that when I say something, it's right. @#!*% upbringing!!

Blame it on my parents!!

Bob E.
Click to expand...

I'm doomed. Soon enough I'll be old and decrepit, and halfwits like the subject of this thread will be running the world.

Never mind, they already are...
 
And you'll be reduced to laughing at your own past comments, as above...
 
vpwphoto said:
Yes... depressingly funny.
I fired her. She couldn't believe it, and said it was my loss.
To much bravado, and self assurance, she was unteachable.
Click to expand...

And the best part is you could see it all coming anyway. Lack of depth, lack of critical thinking, indications of shallow pursuits (no pun intended). Prophecy fulfilled. Sigh, youth of today.
 
Alan Johnson said:
I think you will find that top pro photographers do in fact use shallow depth of field a lot, presumeably that's what sells clothes in non-studio settings.

http://www.vogue.co.uk/magazine/archive/issue/2013/June #1
Click to expand...

I agree, I use the old f2 on my 105 all the time.
She just thought that was the only way to photograph.
She couldn't understand why I stopped the Hasselblad down to F8 in the studio, and thought that f2.8 plannar was worthless.
 
Cain't do nuthin' bout thems whats thinks they knows.

BTW, "bohka" is the spelling in India.
 
Back in the 90s, 50 1.8s and 50 1.4s were the kit lenses. They were on the camera because they were cheap

Now everyone fawns over them like its the second coming of Jesus
I used a 50 1.4 wide open for my Junior High photos of all my friends because it was too dark in the cafeteria and classrooms for anything slower

I wish I could have closed down for some of the group shots
 
I really dislike the 'everything wide open' crap that's going around. It's just silly.

And all the terminology that goes with it makes it so that I cringe when I hear someone talk about it.

Swirly bokeh takes the medal for the one that actually makes me physically sick...

Not using depth of field as something creative, as well as a control, is a bit of a mystery to me.
 
Thomas, those who don't know and don't know that they don't know ...
 
Also, Bokeh is to photographers as Wabi is to watch collectors
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register