Subjective sound bokeh - interesting analogy.

[IPunchCholla]

OK, let me join again sharing only one of my photos which I referred in my post #6 where it was/is under the spoiler cover.
In this post, I share it not under spoiler cover for your direct observation.

In July last year, I posted one typical photo with beautiful (and rather intensive) "bokeh" background taken by CANON EF24-105mm F4L IS II USM lens attached to CANON EOS 5D Mark IV DSLR camera (ref. my post here and here). Please simply PM me if you would like to have original jpeg photo of 6517x4381, FL 85 mm, f/4 (open aperture), 1/1250 sec, ISO 640, 11.4 MB, no-flash, hand-held.
View attachment 508762

Maybe, the bokeh in this photo would be "uninteresting" according to the feelings of @rf1938, @pablolie and @Keith_W, though...

I have and love that lens, and it’s a nice photo but the bokeh is nothing to write home about. It’s just good use of out of focus. Interesting, or characterful bokeh is easiest to see in highlights in the out of focus region. Look at @pablolie’s photo at the bar. Look at the bright blurred whites. Then look at the the surrounding areas of lighter gray and the way shape and color blend. That is bokeh that is easily readable. I’m not saying I like or dislike it more or less, just that the character of blur (which is bokeh) is readily visible. It’s not in your image. Bokeh isn’t blur. It is the shape and color of blur. In your image that character is smooth and even and hard to see because of a lack of localized tonal variation . Bokeh fans tend to like more idiosyncratic character.

 

[dualazmak]

Hopefully, this post would be my final participation (post) on this exciting thread.

In my photo below, all the "objects of interest" are in strict/exact focus, and only the background dark-green thick drape is out-of-focus in nice and beautiful bokeh/blur. This would nicely represent/imitate, would be an analogy of, my preferred "subjective sound bokeh" (if OP @Neuro would still say so) in my listening pleasure in my acoustic environments (ref. #931 and #1,009 on my project thread).

 

[pablolie]

... Look at @pablolie’s photo at the bar. Look at the bright blurred whites. Then look at the the surrounding areas of lighter gray and the way shape and color blend. That is bokeh that is easily readable...

In no way did I imply I am in a quality bokeh picture contest here. My point was and remains that I can not in any way relate to the analogy of visual picture bokeh to music presentation by a music system.
Bokeh in photography is a creative tool. The creative element in music is done by musicians and their production team, and we want to hear it as true to life and unmasked as possible. Our audio systems better stay out of it all the way. That was my only point when disputing the analogy.
I like each and every picture posted here because they represent our intent and truth. And that's what I want our audio systems to do. You wouldn't want Photoshop to randomly introduce bokeh elements into a picture you took and that reflects your intent. Equally, our audio equipment should stay the hell neutral, ideally, and just truthfully reflect the original intent of the artist/producer/sound-engineer.
That's all. Not a picture contest.

 

[pablolie]

OK, let me join again sharing only one of my photos which I referred in my post #6 where it was/is under the spoiler cover.
In this post, I share it not under spoiler cover for your direct observation.

In July last year, I posted one typical photo with beautiful (and rather intensive) "bokeh" background taken by CANON EF24-105mm F4L IS II USM lens attached to CANON EOS 5D Mark IV DSLR camera (ref. my post here and here). Please simply PM me if you would like to have original jpeg photo of 6517x4381, FL 85 mm, f/4 (open aperture), 1/1250 sec, ISO 640, 11.4 MB, no-flash, hand-held.
View attachment 508762

Maybe, the bokeh in this photo would be "uninteresting" according to the feelings of @rf1938, @pablolie and @Keith_W, though...

In no way whatsoever is this a picture I find uninteresting. It's absolutely great.

My argument has been about the flawed analogy, never about opposition to bokeh in photography as a creative tool (I clearly love to use it, and I have loved photography about as long as I have good audio systems - my Dad introduced me to both). I hope I made that extensively clear.

 

[majingotan]

Here's a bokeh of my travel camera (fixed lens) shot wide open at f/2

It forms a cat's eye bokeh on the out of focus areas

 

[dualazmak]

In no way whatsoever is this a picture I find uninteresting. It's absolutely great.

My argument has been about the flawed analogy, never about opposition to bokeh in photography as a creative tool (I clearly love to use it, and I have loved photography about as long as I have good audio systems - my Dad introduced me to both). I hope I made that extensively clear.

Thank you indeed for your kind words.
No warries, I fully understand and much respect your points, especially "bokeh in photography as a creative tool" with no relation to "subjective sound bokeh".

Again, hopefully my final(?) participation (post) on this exciting thread with two of my photos which have nothing to do with my preferred "subjective sound bokeh".

 

[ahofer]

Are we absolutely determined to conflate and confuse artistic/production decisions with REproduction decisions?

Perhaps we should go around with goop on our glasses and soft cheese in our ears.

 

[Mort]

You wouldn't want Photoshop to randomly introduce bokeh elements into a picture you took and that reflects your intent. Equally, our audio equipment should stay the hell neutral, ideally, and just truthfully reflect the original intent of the artist/producer/sound-engineer

In my opinion, your rebuttal to the analogy is too strong.

Do you correct for the room?
Do you have a preferred curve?
Do you have a dispersion preference?
Do you have a loudness preference?

These are all changes to the 'original intent' which is a very slippery concept to be throwing around. Honestly, the language used sounds reminds me of the 'purity of signal' snobs we get all the time here.

 

[IPunchCholla]

In no way did I imply I am in a quality bokeh picture contest here. My point was and remains that I can not in any way relate to the analogy of visual picture bokeh to music presentation by a music system.
Bokeh in photography is a creative tool. The creative element in music is done by musicians and their production team, and we want to hear it as true to life and unmasked as possible. Our audio systems better stay out of it all the way. That was my only point when disputing the analogy.
I like each and every picture posted here because they represent our intent and truth. And that's what I want our audio systems to do. You wouldn't want Photoshop to randomly introduce bokeh elements into a picture you took and that reflects your intent. Equally, our audio equipment should stay the hell neutral, ideally, and just truthfully reflect the original intent of the artist/producer/sound-engineer.
That's all. Not a picture contest.

My phrasing was bad. I was only trying to point out bokeh isn’t a binary thing it isn’t just there or not. It is the tone and shape of blur and changes from lens to lens. It is also a container word indicating the presence of interesting or unusual forms of out of focuses.

It is present in all the images but in some it is smoothe like a mirror and others it is bumpy like a river. Neither is good or bad, but people using the term in the officianado sense tend to prefer unusual.

It is absolutely a production technique and has only niche places in display. Jim Campbell is one artist who has used it in interesting ways, But I’ve seen work by numerous artists that use it or an analog. We don’t usually call them photographers, but installation or something matching else. So it can be used in presentation. I’ve done so myself in a series of paintings that are more legible the blurrier your vision. But in my experience it is most impactful when used by the artist with clear intent.

I personally wouldn’t ever do so, but if someone wants to blur my work after they buy it, ok.

 

[RexrothPigeon]

Are we absolutely determined to conflate and confuse artistic/production decisions with REproduction decisions?

Perhaps we should go around with goop on our glasses and soft cheese in our ears.

French brie makes even the scuzziest punk rock sound classy, but I prefer Swiss (for neutrality of course).

 

[ahofer]

French brie makes even the scuzziest punk rock sound classy, but I prefer Swiss, for a neutrality.

I’m known in another thread for my theories about certain…additives.